Appeal No. 2000-1313
Application No. 08/797,478
The examiner recognizes that Intini lacks tabs which
extend beyond the sealing area and are not sealed together, as
required by independent claims 1 and 16, but contends that the
provision of such tabs would have been obvious in view of the
teachings of such tabs by Wardwell. For the reasons which
follow, it is our opinion that the examiner's rejection is not
well founded.
The outer layers 12, 14 of Intini, and hence the tabs 32,
38 and panels 44 and tear sections 50 thereof, are adhered
together so that both are pulled back together to cause
delamination of the panel 44 or tear section 50. In fact, the
configuration of cutouts forming the tabs provides a thorough
resistance to tear initiation and thus provides a greater
security against children being able to open the package
(column 4, lines 66-68). In that the top and bottom layers
are intended to be pulled together to render the package more
child resistant, the examiner's argument that it would have
been obvious in view of Wardwell to provide an unadhered
portion at the edges between the sheets of Intini "so there is
less resistance to tearing to facilitate retrieval of the
article" (answer, page 4) is not well taken. Accordingly, we
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007