Appeal 2007-3955
Application 09/756,956
Claim 1 is illustrative:
1. A process for manufacturing patterned fabrics comprising
the steps of:
applying a water soluble chemical substance designed to
physically inhibit wetting to selected regions of a fabric to define
treated and untreated regions forming a pattern, wherein the treated
regions to which the chemical substance is applied are characterized
by reduced wetability relative to the untreated regions; and
exposing substantially the entire fabric to an aqueous dye liquor
until said untreated regions are saturated while said treated regions are
less than fully saturated, to thereby form a patterned fabric.
The Examiner relies upon the following references:
Thomas US 4,131,422 Dec. 26, 1978
Moore US 5,984,977 Nov. 16, 1999
Kanzig WO 99/67459 Dec. 29, 1999
Appealed claims 1-42 stand rejected as unpatentable as follows:
(i) claims 1-9, 14, 16-22, 25-39 and 41-42 are rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102 (b) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
obvious over Kanzig ;
(ii) claims 1-42 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102 (b) as anticipated by or,
in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as obvious over Thomas; and
(iii) claims 1, 3, 4, 7, 9, 14, 17, 19-20, 22, 30, 31, 33-34, 36-38
and 42 rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as obvious over Moore.
We have thoroughly reviewed each of Appellants’ arguments for
patentability. However, we are in full agreement with the Examiner that the
claimed subject matter is unpatentable over the cited prior art. Accordingly,
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013