Appeal No. 1999-0702 Page 7
Application No. 08/858,564
Specifically, the appellant points out the warmer of Kiyohara
does not have an airtight bag sealingly enveloping an
air-permeable bag having a non-slip layer as an outermost
layer of the air-permeable bag as recited in claims 10 to 16.
We agree. The examiner's position (answer, p. 4) that since
the peelable paper 15 is removed prior to use of the air-
permeable bag 10 thus establishing the tackifier coating layer
14 as the outermost layer of the air-permeable bag 10 during
use is without merit with regard to the subject matter of
claims 10 to 16. In that regard, the claimed subject matter
requires the non-slip layer to be an outermost layer of the
air-permeable bag while the air-permeable bag is sealingly
enveloped by an airtight bag. Clearly, Kiyohara does not3
teach or suggest the subject matter of claims 10 to 16.
3We understand this claimed limitation to require, in
light of the underlying disclosure, that the air-permeable bag
is free of any layer, covering, etc. overlaying the non-slip
layer of the air-permeable bag (e.g., no release layer such as
Kiyohara's peelable paper 15) while the air-permeable bag is
sealingly enveloped by an airtight bag. That is, there is no
layer, covering, etc. between the outermost non-slip layer of
the air-permeable bag and the inside surface of the airtight
bag while the air-permeable bag is sealingly enveloped by the
airtight bag.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007