Appeal No. 2000-1313
Application No. 08/797,478
extend beyond the sealing area and are not sealed to one
another.
While Wardwell discloses a sealed package having pull
tabs, we find no suggestion in the combined teachings of Kurtz
and Wardwell to provide both the perforations taught by Kurtz
and the pull tabs taught by Wardwell in a single package. The
perforations of Kurtz are provided to facilitate opening of
the package by tearing, while the pull tabs of Wardwell are
provided to facilitate opening in an alternative manner, by
pulling the top and bottom sheets apart. From our
perspective, the references suggest one feature or the other,
but not both.
For the foregoing reasons, we cannot sustain the
examiner's rejection of claims 1-7 and 16-21 as being
unpatentable over Kurtz in view of Wardwell.
Claims 8-15
In accordance with 37 CFR § 1.192(c)(7), we have selected
independent claim 8 as the representative claim from the
appellants' grouping of claims 8-15 to decide the appeal on
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007