Appeal No. 1998-2029 Page 6
Application No. 08/258,643
perimetric edge to the sheet to close the pouch in a fluid
tight manner.
The appellant argues (brief, p. 10) that the applied
prior art does not teach the limitation that the pouch has a
thermoplastic layer sealed to the sheet about a perimetric
edge which completely surrounds the fenestration as set forth
in independent claim 7. The examiner did not respond to this
argument.
After reviewing the teachings of the applied prior art
(i.e., Idris, Morris and Staller), we find ourselves in
agreement with the appellant that the applied prior art does
not teach the limitation that the pouch has a thermoplastic
layer sealed to the sheet about a perimetric edge which
completely surrounds the fenestration as set forth in
independent claim 7. Thus, the applied prior art does not2
2The appellant appears to have admitted (specification,
p. 9) that drapes that meet this limitation are described in
U.S. Patent No. 5,161,544 (the subject matter of this patent
appears to have been published on September 18, 1991 as
European Patent Application 0 447 217 A1 and therefore would
(continued...)
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007