Appeal No. 2006-1769
Application No. 09/784,292
Similarly, with respect to Sauer, the examiner pointed to the
teaching in the reference that the side panel (46) may have any size
and shape which provides the desired expansion of the absorbent
article (20), including triangular and elliptical shapes, in which the
waist edge would not be parallel to the leg edge when in a laid flat
configuration. (Examiner’s Answer, p. 6, see also Sauer, col. 9, lines
1-5).
With regard to claims 1, 21 and 34, the examiner has
determined that it would have been obvious at the time the invention
was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said
subject matter pertains to make an absorbent article, such as that
taught by Kuen, having side panels in a shape other than rectangular,
such as triangular or elliptical, in view the teachings of Keuhn, Jr. and
Sauer, such that the panel waist edge is nonparallel to the leg edges
when in a laid flat configuration.
The appellants contend that Kuen ‘162 fails to explicitly
describe any shapes other than rectangular for the strap members (40)
and that there is no suggestion or motivation in Kuen ‘162 that the
suggested “other shapes” would include a waist edge that is non-
parallel with a leg edge. (Appellants’ Brief, p. 5).
The appellants further argue that because the strap members
(40) in Kuen ‘162 rest on a wearer’s hips, the leg end edge of the strap
members does not extend down to a wearer’s legs, whereas the
-7-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007