Appeal 2007-2409
Application 10/034,846
111. A disposable absorbent article having a longitudinal axis, a
lateral axis, and a lateral centerline generally defining longitudinal front and
back regions of the article, said article having a front end and a back end and
comprising:
a liner adapted for contiguous relationship with a wearer's body;
an outer cover in generally opposed relationship with the liner, at least
one of said liner and said outer cover being stretchable in at least one
direction, the article having a surface area defined at least in part by at least
one of said liner and said outer cover; and
an absorbent core disposed between the liner and the outer cover and
having a front edge, a back edge, and a surface area which is less than about
50% of the surface area of the article, the front edge of the absorbent core
being in a closer proximity to the front end of the article than the back edge
of the absorbent core is to the back end of the article, said at least one of said
liner and said outer cover extending beyond the front and back edges of the
absorbent core and being stretchable adjacent said front and back edges.
Cited References:
Roe US 5,904,643 May 18, 1999
Clear PCT WO 96/18367 June 20, 1996
Morman PCT WO 00/33913 Dec. 21, 1999
Divo EP 0 650 714 A1 May 3, 1995
Grounds of Rejection1
Claims 83-89, 91-92, and 106-111 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as
anticipated by Clear.
1 The Answer on pp. 2-3 also notes that there are two additional grounds of
rejection not withdrawn by the Examiner but not under review on appeal as
they were not presented for appeal by Appellant in the Brief. These
grounds are a rejection of claim 90 for obviousness over Morman and Clear
(Answer 3) and a rejection of claim 93 for obviousness over Roe in view of
Divo.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013