Appeal 2007-1563
Application 10/462,067
material such that there would be motivation to combine Hansen’s non-
fugitive densification agent with Chen’s stabilized or unstabilized densified
absorbent material 51 to improve the “densification properties of the fibers”
(Hansen, Abstract).
For the above reasons, we affirm the Examiner’s § 103(a) rejection of
argued claims 8 and 26 and non-argued claim 9.
DEPENDENT CLAIMS 41, 49, AND 52
Appellants argue that the Examiner’s claim construction of “a first
three dimensionally patterned stabilized absorbent layer” as including
Chen’s bodyside liner indicates that only one of the elements of claims 41,
49, and 52 (i.e., the three-dimensionally stabilized absorbent layer) is
disclosed by Chen (Br. 12). Appellants argue that there would be no
motivation to add an additional liner (i.e., so as to satisfy the here claimed
liner requirement) over Chen’s bodyside liner because doing so would
“render the essential hydrophobic material in the secondary liner
unsatisfactory for its intended use and would change a key principle of
operation [of the liner] . . .” (Br. 14).
We have considered all of Appellants’ arguments and find them
unpersuasive for the reasons below.
Chen discloses that the basesheets (i.e., a first three-dimensional
patterned stabilized absorbent layer) may be “multi-ply basesheet structures
and laminates with one or more layers being the dual-zoned webs described
above” (Chen, col. 36, ll. 64-66). Chen further discloses that the “traditional
fluff pulp absorbent core used in many absorbent articles may be replaced
11
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013