Appeal 2007-1015
Application 10/011,088
wherein at least one of the first and second longitudinal sides of the
chassis forms a straight edge in at least the crotch area of the absorbent
article when the absorbent article is in a flat, planar orientation.
The Examiner relies on the following prior art references as evidence
in rejecting the appealed claims:
Widlund US 4,692,163 Sep. 8, 1987
Newkirk US 5,921,973 Jul. 13, 1999
Blenke US 6,129,720 Oct. 10, 2000
Claims 2, 3, 27, 35, 39, 40, and 41 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(b) as being anticipated by Widlund. Claims 4-6 and 31 stand rejected
under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Widlund in view of
Newkirk. Claims 19-24 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Widlund. Claim 34 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as being unpatentable over Widlund in view of Newkirk. Claims 2,
7-18, 26, 27, 29, and 30 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Blenke in view of Widlund. Claims 25 and 28 stand
rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Blenke in view
of Widlund and Newkirk. Claims 31-33 and 36-38 stand rejected under 35
U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Blenke in view of Widlund and
Newkirk. We affirm the Examiner’s rejections as to all of the claims
subjected to a rejection over prior art including Blenke as relied upon
evidence, and we reverse the first four stated rejections. This Decision also
includes a Remand. Our reasoning follows.
§ 102(b) Rejection
All of the rejected claims require an absorbent article comprising a
chassis that includes, among other features: (1) a biaxially extensible outer
cover; (2) a biaxially extensible bodyside liner; (3) an absorbent core
interposed between the cover and liner; and (4) first and second leg elastic
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013