Appeal No. 2006-1809 Page 2
Application No. 09/975,386
BACKGROUND
The appellant's invention relates to a blanket of fibrous building insulation comprising a
fibrous insulation layer adhered by a layer of adhesive to a facing sheet, the facing sheet having a
grid of perforations therethrough with spots of the adhesive being visible through the
perforations and to a method of making and installing such blanket of insulation. The blanket is
made by forming the perforations in the facing sheet prior to applying the adhesive and applying
the adhesive such that it will bleed into the preformed perforations. The visible spots of
adhesive form a cutting guide on the facing sheet so that the blanket may be cut to size in situ to
correspond with spacing between studs or the like that are non-standard. A copy of the claims
under appeal is set forth in the appendix to the appellant's brief.
The examiner relies upon the following as evidence of unpatentability:
Ryan US 649,363 May 8, 1900
Broderick US 4,709,523 Dec. 1, 1987
Ernest US 6,444,289 B1 Sep. 3, 2002 (Aug. 31, 1999)
The following rejections are before us for review.
Claims 1, 2, 4 and 8 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as being anticipated by
Ernest.
Claim 3 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Ernest in view
of Broderick.
Claims 5-7 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Ernest.
Claim 9 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Ernest in view
of Ryan.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and the
appellant regarding this appeal, we make reference to the examiner's answer (mailed December
22, 2005) for the examiner's complete reasoning in support of the rejections and to the appellant's
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007