Appeal 2006-2969
Application 10/394,075
disclosed limitation or particular embodiment. See, e.g., In re Am. Acad.
of Sci. Tech. Ctr., 367 F.3d 1359, 1364, 70 USPQ2d 1827, 1830 (Fed. Cir.
2004); In re Hyatt, 211 F.3d 1367, 1372, 54 USPQ2d 1664, 1667 (Fed. Cir.
2000); In re Morris, 127 F.3d 1048, 1054-55, 44 USPQ2d 1023, 1027 (Fed.
Cir. 1997); In re Zletz, 893 F.2d 319, 321-22, 13 USPQ2d 1320, 1322 (Fed.
Cir. 1989).
The plain language of independent claim 1 specifies any manner of
textile material comprising at least any manner of surface consisting
essentially of at least any manner of any surface of any area of any fiber or
any yarn, the surface having located thereon about 0.1% to about 0.8% by
weight of the textile material of any discontinuous hydrophobic treatment,
wherein the treatment on the surface is discontinuous to any extent. The
discontinuous hydrophobic treatment comprises at least some amount,
however small, of any manner of discrete, individual hydrophobic particles
that are more hydrophobic than said surface, the hydrophobic particles
“adhering directly to the surface.” The textile material manifests the
property of “increase in the water release rate near dryness” to any extent
over the corresponding untreated textile material (Specification, e.g.,
¶¶ 0003, 0063, and 0064). The plain language of independent claim 25
differs from that of claim 1 in specifying any fabric which comprises at least
any manner of hydrophilic surface, and the hydrophobic particles are
“located directly on said hydrophilic surface.”
The open-ended term “comprising” in the preamble and in the body of
claims 1 and 25 opens the textile material and the fabric to include any
manner of other surfaces of other materials, and the claimed discontinuous
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013