Appeal No. 2006-2539 Page 4
Application No. 10/421,661
2. Rejections based on LaVon
The examiner rejected claims 1 and 7 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as anticipated by
LaVon.1 Examiner’s Answer, page 3. The examiner reasoned that
LaVon et al[.] disclose a method of forming a multilayer polymer structure
comprising applying an elastomer polymer layer to a non-woven web
comprising polyester fibers (claimed dimensionally stable layer A . . .),
applying an adhesive polyurethane hot melt adhesive (claimed
intermediate layer B) . . . to the surface of the fibrous substrate (See
column 7, lines 58-67), and extruding the polymer in a molten state on the
adhesive layer (claimed topcoat layer C).
Id.
The examiner reasoned that the fibrous substrates disclosed by LaVon are “rigid
polymer structures” as defined by the instant specification because
Lavon discloses that . . . the fibrous substrates 14 and/or 16 should
preferably have a tensile strength of at least 1.5 N/cm (1.5 X 1.45 = 2.2
psi) and an elongation of at least 50% in both the machine and cross
direction. . . . As well known in the art flex modulus also represents
stress-strain of a material under dynamic load, flex modulus of a polymer
is in fact or varies in direct proportion to tensile strength.
It is the Examiner’s position that fibrous substrates 14 and/or 16
having tensile strength of at least 1.5 N/cm in LaVon cover claimed rigid
polymers (having flex modulus of more than 15,000 psi and Shore
hardness of 40 or higher) since there is no upper limit in tensile strength
. . . indicated in LaVon.
Id., pages 3-4.
Appellants argue that LaVon does not anticipate because, among other things,
the fibrous substrates of the diapers taught by LaVon do not comprise a “rigid polymer,”
as defined in the instant specification. Appeal Brief, page 6.
1 LaVon et al., U.S. Patent 5,938,648, issued August 17, 1999
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007