Appeal 2006-1924
Application 09/954,506
In order to establish that a garment manufacturing method
corresponding to the method of representative claim 1 would have been
obvious, the Examiner notes another modification of the manufacturing
method of Fernfors that would have been suggested to one of ordinary skill
in the art in the Examiner’s opinion. In particular, Fernfors discloses an in
line method for manufacturing reclosable absorbent garments, such as pants,
and teaches that strips of releasable material are attached, such as by
adhesive or ultrasonic welding, to the garment web at first and second edges
thereof. However, Fernfors furnishes little detail as to how these releasable
strips are supplied and transferred to the moving web during the garment
manufacturing process. See, e.g., the abstract and Fig. 1, elements 5, 8, 9, 13,
and 14 of Fernfors. Concerning these claim features, the Examiner (Answer
8-9) reasonably maintains that, as evidenced by the garment making
teachings of Datta, Pohjola, and/or Rajala, it would have been obvious to
one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to employ the
conventional method of (1) moving fastener material in a direction that
differs from the in line garment/web moving direction,
(2) providing for the cutting of the fastener material to form the fastener
members (releasable strips), (3) rotating the fastener members in a manner
as here clamed at, and (4) applying the rotated fastener members to the
garment/web.
With regard to the latter proposed modification of Fernfors,
Appellants disagree with the Examiner’s obviousness position. Appellants
maintain that one of ordinary skill in the art would not have been led to
employ the teachings of Datta, Pohjola and/or Rajala, as relied upon by the
Examiner, in modifying the method of Fernfors.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007