Appeal No. 2000-2017
Application 08/935,916
Montgomery forms a flexible, but not necessary resilient, jacket
for the pack of sheets as Montgomery recites in the title to his
invention. We do not find in Montgomery any teaching or
suggestion for a flexible base that would resiliently return the
dispenser to its initial configuration upon removal of the
folding force. Likewise, we do not find in Montgomery the
teaching or suggestion for a flexible base requiring about 2 to 5
pounds of force to fold along its longitudinal fold line. These
limitations from the independent claims on appeal are not taught
by Montgomery, Collie or the French applied prior art.
Furthermore, with respect to obviousness, notwithstanding
the examiner’s findings with respect to heat sealing cycle time,
we find no teaching or suggestion that would have provided
motivation to manufacture the jacket of Montgomery from the
material taught by the Collie reference. In our view, this
combination of references is based on impermissible hindsight
reconstruction of the claimed subject matter.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007