Appeal 2007-1323
Application 10/032,701
(III) claims 16 and 35. The claims of each group will stand or fall together.
37 C.F.R. § 41.37(c)(1)(vii). Therefore, we limit our discussion to
representative claims 11, 14, and 16.
Claim 11:
Claim 11 is drawn to an absorbent garment. According to Appellants’
Specification, “[a]bsorbent garments can be configured as . . . a diaper-type
product . . .” (Specification 1). Claim 11 requires the garment to comprise a
body panel having a line of weakness extending across at least a portion
thereof. The body panels may be comprised of nonwoven materials
(Specification 7). The Specification defines the term “line of weakness” as
any region or area of weakened material, preferably having a
length and which may or may not have a defined width, and can
include linear and non-linear patterns. . . . The line of weakness
can include a perforation or other series of cuts, a thinning, or
breakage or separation of material . . . that is more easily torn or
broken than the adjacent portions. . . .
(Id.) Appellants’ Specification discloses that the “garment provides a simple
and convenient way to convert a pant-type garment into an open product
simply by providing a line of weakness that has sufficiently low tensile and
tear strengths, so as to allow the user to break the garment along the line of
weakness without undue effort” (Specification 2). Claim 11 requires the
body panel to have a tear strength of less than about 5 lbf along the line of
weakness.
The Examiner finds that Igaue teaches all of the claimed limitations
except for the specific tear strength (Answer 4). Igaue teaches a disposable
diaper, an absorbent garment within the scope of Appellants’ claimed
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013