Appeal 2006-2949
Application 10/012,768
1. A hydraulically entangled nonwoven fabric comprising:
recycled synthetic fibers and fiber-like materials comprising at least
one thread element composed of synthetic material having at least one
irregular distortion generated by hydraulic fracture of the thread element to
separate it from a bonded fibrous material while the bonded fibrous material
is suspended in a liquid.
The references relied on by the Examiner are:
Adam 5,573,841 Nov. 12, 1996
Milding 6,037,282 Mar. 14, 2000
The Examiner has rejected appealed claims 1 through 17 under 35
U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Adam in view of Milding
(Answer 3-6), and has provisionally rejected appealed claims 1 through 17
under the judicially created doctrine of obviousness-type double patenting as
being unpatentable over claims 1 through 17 of copending Application
10/012,766 (final action mailed May 23, 2005 (final action) 1).1,2
Appellants argue claim 1 with respect to the first ground of rejection,
and generally addresses the second ground of rejection (Br. 10-12 and 12).
Thus, we decide this appeal based on appealed claim 1 as representative of
the grounds of rejection and Appellants’ groupings of claims. 37 C.F.R.
§ 41.37(c)(1)(vii) (2005).
We affirm.
1 The Examiner has withdrawn the ground of rejection of claims 1 through
17 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Adam in view of
Kean and further in view of Didwania (Answer 3).
2 The Examiner states that the provisional ground of rejection under the
judicially created doctrine of obviousness-type double patenting is not
presented for review in Appellants’ Brief (Answer 3) when in fact
Appellants state their intention with respect to this ground (Br. 12). Thus, on
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007