Appeal 2007-1220
Application 10/688,033
In Figure 4, “Tg1” is the thickness of the base and “H” is the hook height.
(Br. 2-3; Spec. 6.)
The claimed subject matter is reflected in independent claims 24 and
40. The disputed claim language has been italicized. These claims read:
24. A woven hook fastener product including a fabric
base having ground yarns comprising interwoven warp yarns
and filling yarns extending respectively in warp and filling
directions, and hook filaments interwoven with the fabric
base and forming hooks extending from one side of the fabric
base for engagement with loops, each hook being formed by
a severed hook filament loop extending out of the fabric
base,
wherein the hook filaments extend from a near side of
the fabric base to a mean hook height of less than about 6.0
times a nominal diameter of the hook filaments.
40. A woven hook fastener product including a fabric
base having ground yarns comprising interwoven warp yarns
and filling yarns extending respectively in warp and
filling directions, and hook filaments interwoven with the
fabric base and forming hooks extending from one side of the
fabric base for engagement with loops,
wherein the fabric base has an overall thickness,
exclusive of the hook filaments, that is less than the nominal
hook filament diameter.
The Examiner has entered the following grounds of rejection:
1. Claims 24-34, 36, 40-46 and 48 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as obvious over Higachinaka, U.S. 5,515,583.
2. Claims 35 and 47 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
obvious over Higachinaka in view of Reither, U.S. 6,136,437.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013