Appeal 2007-1942
Application 10/368,975
V. Analysis
Anticipation
First we note that the claims use the transitional phrase “comprising”
and therefore do not exclude additional, unrecited elements. Thus, Dennis’
argument that the Sacks fabric contains materials, e.g., polycarbonate, not
specifically recited in the present claims is not persuasive.
The fabric of claims 1, 5, and 6 requires a central strand layer made of
an aramid material such as KevlarŪ and a pair of “springy foam layers”
having an outer surface formed of cross-linked polyethylene (referred to
herein as the polyethylene layers). In addition, the polyethylene layers must
be “symmetrically disposed about said central strand layer.” Dennis’
Specification does not define the phrase “symmetrically disposed.” Our
understanding is that when a pair of first items are “symmetrically disposed”
about a second item, one of the first items is on one side of the second item
and the other first item is on the other side of the second item. Such a
construction of the phrase is consistent with the illustration at Figure 3 of the
Dennis’ Specification.
The Examiner found that Sacks discloses polyethylene “layers
symmetrically disposed about said central strand layer” since Sacks
discloses a polyethylene layer at the back of the central strand and an
additional layer of “impact absorbing material … at the front of said fabric.”
(FF 3 10 and 13; Ex. Ans. 3). In other words, the Examiner found that one
polyethylene layer is on the back of the central strand layer (i.e., the backing
3 Finding of Fact.3
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013