Appeal 2007-1210
Application 10/258,733
Appellants’ claimed invention is directed to a textile product
including an arginine or arginine salt additive together with a cationic
binder. The textile product is disclosed as being useful for preserving skin
moisture when the textile product is worn near the skin (paragraph bridging
Specification pp. 1 and 2). Pyrrolidonecarboxylic acid is another disclosed
additive that is said to have similar properties and can be used together with
the arginine or arginine salt additive. Claim 1 is illustrative and is
reproduced below:
1. A textile product comprising arginine and a cationic
binder, wherein arginine is free arginine or a salt of arginine with at
least one member selected from the group consisting of hydrochloric
acid, sulfuric acid, nitric acid, phosphoric acid, citric acid, succinic
acid, p-toluenesulfonic acid, methanesulfonic acid, sodium and
potassium.
The Examiner relies on the following prior art references as evidence
in rejecting the appealed claims:
Cho US 5,366,665 Nov. 22, 1994
Nogata US 5,278,461 Mar. 17, 1998
Takano US 5,100,655 Mar. 31, 1992
Claims 1, 3, 5-8 and 13-19 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
being unpatentable over Cho in view of Nogata and Takano.
The Examiner bears the initial burden, on review of prior art or on any
other ground, of presenting a prima facie case of unpatentability. In re
Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 1445, 24 USPQ2d 1443, 1444 (Fed. Cir. 1992).
The question before us here is: Has the Examiner met that burden?
We answer that question in the negative. We reverse for substantially the
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013