Appeal No. 2000-1789 Page 11
Application No. 08/699,572
(6) the strip of non-stick material forming a surface discontinuity extending to an edge of
the blank creating an air passage for precluding formation of an air vacuum suction lock
between abutting blanks as recited in clause E of claim 16; and (7) the plurality of
substantially flat, unfolded blanks arranged in an aligned stack with air passages
formed by the strip of non-stick material extending to the edge of the stack to permit
easy separation of abutting stacked blanks as recited in clause F of claim 16.
With regard to these differences, the examiner determined (answer, pages 3-4)
that
[i]t would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have employed
adhesive areas covered by release strips in the construction of the blank of
Kaplan in view of the teachings of Giacovas, motivated by the ease of using
pressure sensitive adhesive areas covered by release strips instead of cohesive
glue.
With respect to claim 1, the appellant states (brief, page 16) that "the only fair
reading of the references [Kaplan and Giacovas] and the combination of them would be
to place the Giacovas' adhesive areas [e.g., Giacovas' tape 42, water glue 49, adhesive
50 and cover strip 53 shown in Figure 1A] in the locations of Kaplan's cohesive
material." We agree with that statement and believe that to be the examiner's position
as set forth in the rejection of claim 1 before us in this appeal.
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007