Appeal No. 2006-2539 Page 6
Application No. 10/421,661
range of 150 to 350 °C . . . is only that of a range, not a specific temperature in that
range, and the disclosure of a range is no more a disclosure of the end points of the
range than it is of each of the intermediate points.”).
Thus, LaVon’s disclosure of a material having a tensile strength of at least 2.2 psi
(i.e., a range of tensile strengths ranging from 2.2 psi to infinity) is not a disclosure of
materials having specific tensile strengths above 2.2 psi. More specifically, LaVon does
not disclose a material having a tensile strength (or flex modulus) of 15,000 psi.
Even assuming that tensile strength and flex modulus are directly proportional, it
is reasonable to expect that a material having a tensile strength of 2.2 psi will have very
different properties from those of a material having a flex modulus of 15,000 psi. The
examiner has provided no evidence or reasoned explanation of why those skilled in the
art would consider the disclosure of a material having a tensile strength of 2.2 psi to
effectively disclose a material having a flex modulus of 15,000 psi.
The examiner has pointed to Wnuk2 as evidence that persons skilled in the art
would have considered materials with a flex modulus of 15,000 psi to be suitable for use
in LaVon’s diapers. See the Examiner’s Answer, pages 10-11.
We do not agree that Wnuk supports the examiner’s position. Wnuk discloses
that “films formed from the compositions of the present invention may be particularly
well-suited for use as a biodegradable, liquid impervious backsheet in disposable
absorbent articles such as diapers.” Column 34, lines 21-24 (emphasis added). In this
context, Wnuk teaches that “the tear strengths should be as high as possible consistent
with the realization of other properties preferred for a backsheet. . . . It has been found
2 Wnuk et al., U.S. Patent 5,939,467, issued August 17, 1999
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007