Appeal No. 2007-0752 Page 5
Application No. 09/957,109
Anticipation:
Claims 1, 5 and 6 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being
anticipated by Unger. For clarity, we reproduce Unger’s figures 8 and 10 below:
The examiner find that Unger teaches a pantiliner that includes a liner 38,
a baffle 40, a core 42 between the liner 38 and the baffle 40. Answer, page 4.
The examiner finds that Unger’s pantiliner comprises at least one fold line 36
defining a central area 34 and two peripheral side areas on the outside of the fold
line 36 including the area labeled 50. Id. The examiner finds that Unger’s
pantiliner has two longitudinal ends wherein the first longitudinal end 30 is wider
than the second longitudinal end 28. Id. In addition the examiner finds that the
fold line 36 does not penetrate the baffle. Id. According to the examiner Unger’s
device includes all of the structures set forth in appellants’ claims and is capable
of folding. Id.
Appellants assert that their claimed pantiliner has four features.
Specifically it is:
(i) a convertible pantiliner (i.e., it may be used with conventional
panties or with thong panties, see the specification at page 10, lines
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013