Appeal No. 95-0353
Application 07/837,241
§ 112, first paragraph, for failing to provide an adequate
description.
Opinion
We have carefully considered the respective positions
advanced by appellants and the examiner. For the reasons set
forth below, we will not sustain either of the examiner's
rejections.
Rejection Under 35 U.S.C. § 103
The issue before us with regard to the obviousness rejection
is whether the teaching of Bonis would have suggested to one
having ordinary skill in the art to insert an opaque plastic
outer intermediate layer between appellants’ claimed inner
intermediate layer and outer layer of pigmented plastic to arrive
at the subject matter of the claims on appeal. Bonis discloses a
process for molding multilayered hollow plastic containers and
teaches that where a recycled plastic is employed, thin outer and
inner plastic films are applied to recycled plastic “to bury it”
(col. 1, lines 33-46). We find that the prior art falls short of
suggesting the claimed subject matter.
According to appellants, the problem is that recycled
plastic often has a dark color and that if the thin plastic films
applied to the recycled plastic have a lighter pigment, then the
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007