Appeal No. 2000-1313
Application No. 08/797,478
Reference is made to the brief (Paper No. 14) and the
answer (Paper No. 15) for the respective positions of the
appellants and the examiner with regard to the merits of these
rejections.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given
careful consideration to the appellants' specification and
claims, to the applied prior art references, and to the
respective positions articulated by the appellants and the
examiner. As a consequence of our review, we make the
determinations which follow.
Rejection (1)
Independent claim 1 reads as follows:
1. A tamper-evident sealed package for a product
comprising a top sheet and a bottom sheet, the top
sheet sealed to the bottom sheet so as to seal the
product between the top and bottom sheets and
provide a sealed package, the portion of the top and
bottom sheets that are sealed to each other defining
sealing areas, wherein at least a portion of the top
sheet and a portion of the bottom sheet include tabs
which extend beyond the sealing area2 and are not
sealed to one another, the top sheet of the sealed
package having at least one perforation in its
sealing area so that when the sheets are separated
2 It appears that "area" should be "areas."
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007