United States Federal Circuit

In rejecting several claims of a US Patent for dental floss, the Board of Patent Appeals properly denied the inventors the benefit of the earlier filing date of a 1988 application. Evidence demonstrates that microcrystalline wax was the only friction-enhancing coating conveyed by the inventors when the 1988 application was filed, and that dental flosses made of coated polytetrafluoroethylene filaments would not be expected to be commercially acceptable.

Appellate Information

• Decided 01/06/2004
• Published 01/06/2004

Judges

• CLEVENGER, Circuit Judge., Before CLEVENGER, DYK and PROST, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Federal Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• James Galbraith, Kenyon & Kenyon, of New York, NY, argued for appellant.   On the brief were Patrick J. Birde, Donna M. Praiss, Mark A. Chapman, and Michael K. Levy., David H. Pfeffer, Morgan & Finnegan, L.L.P., of New York, NY, for amicus curiae W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc. With him on the brief were J. Robert Dailey and Michael S. Marcus, Morgan & Finnegan, L.L.P., of Washington, DC.


• For Appellees:
  
• William LaMarca, Associate Solicitor, Office of the Solicitor, United States Patent and Trademark Office, of Arlington, VA, argued for appellee.   With him on the brief were John M. Whealan, Solicitor;  and Raymond T. Chen, Associate Solicitor.