Appeal No. 96-4102
Application 08/500,421
stated that it would have been obvious as within the general
skill of the worker to select a known material on the basis of
its suitability for the intended use, the examiner has not shown
that the chlorine-stable synthetic resin is indeed well known for
the intended use claimed by appellants. The examiner has simply
provided no evidence with respect to chlorine-stable synthetic
resin in a tear-openable container for flowable materials.
Therefore, the rejection of claims 5 and 6 is reversed.
SUMMARY
The rejection of claim 4 under 35 U.S.C. § 102 has been
affirmed. The rejection of claims 5 and 6 under 35 U.S.C. § 103
has been reversed. The examiner’s rejections are affirmed-in-
part.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007