Ex parte DARR et al. - Page 3

          Appeal No. 95-0353                                                          
          Application 07/837,241                                                      

           112, first paragraph, for failing to provide an adequate                  
               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                   
                          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            


Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007