Ex Parte Bergquist et al - Page 2

              Appeal 2007-2138                                                                     
              Application 10/645,885                                                               
                    Appellants claim a non-woven hydroentangled textile with a central             
              area of low basis weight surrounded on both sides by areas of higher basis           
              weight formed of synthetic fibers, the textile having an Air Permeability            
              ranging from 300 to 1000.                                                            

                    Representative claim 1 reads as follows:                                       

                    1.  A non-woven hydroentangled textile formed in cross-section with            
              a central area of low basis weight surrounded on both sides by areas of              
              higher basis weight, the areas of higher basis weight being formed of fibers         
              consisting of synthetic fibers, the textile having an Air Permeability ranging       
              from 300 to 1000 and being incapable of separation in multiple layers after          
              formation without destruction of the textile.                                        

                    The references set forth below are relied upon by the Examiner as              
              evidence of obviousness:                                                             
              Suskind ('320)   EP 0308320   Mar. 22, 1989                                          
              Suskind ('467)   4,808,467   Feb. 28, 1989                                           
              Wagner    5,951,991   Sep. 14, 1999                                                  
              Bouchette    6,110,848   Aug. 29, 2000                                               
              Bergquist    6,723,330 B2  Apr. 20, 2004                                             

                    Claims 1, 3, 4 and 7-18 are rejected under the first paragraph of              
              35 U.S.C. § 112 as failing to comply with the written description                    
              requirement.1                                                                        

                                                                                                  
              1  We observe that the Examiner's theory for this rejection is not applicable to     
              rejected claims 13 and 15 but is applicable to nonrejected claims 20 and 21.         
              These inconsistencies are harmless in light of our disposition of the § 112          
              rejection.                                                                           
                                                2                                                  

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next

Last modified: September 9, 2013