Appeal 2007-4310
Application 10/950,830
2a. What is the meaning of the limitation, found in independent
claims 1 and 19, "the resin being discontinuous on the scrim, such that at
least a portion of the scrim fibers is visible on the second major surface"?
2b. What is the meaning of the limitation, found in independent
claim 18, "the foamed latex resin providing discontinuous coverage of the
scrim fibers on the second major surface"?
To each of these legal questions corresponds the factual question,
does Mangum teach (or suggest) the limitation?
It is also necessary to resolve the factual question, does Mangum
teach "multi-scrim non-slip pads comprising multiple layers of the same
scrim type" that have a "skid-resistant" surface as required by independent
claims 1 and 19?
B. FINDING OF FACT (FF)
The following findings of fact and any set out in the Discussion, infra,
are supported by a preponderance of the evidence of record.
The 830 Application
1. According to Price, it is conventional to make drawer and shelf liners
by coating a generally porous sheet material that has openings that pass from
one surface to the other, called a "scrim," with a resin that is then foamed.
(830 Application at 1, ¶ 2.)
2. Price describes an embodiment, illustrated schematically in Figures 1
and 2 (830 Application at 3, ¶ 14).
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013