Appeal No. 95-1110
Application 07/983,173
THE REJECTION
Claims 1-16 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over either Wolrab or Fassauer, each taken with
JP ‘752, Chandler and Evans.
OPINION
We have carefully considered all of the arguments advanced
by appellants and the examiner and agree with appellants that the
aforementioned rejection is not well founded. Accordingly, this
rejection will be reversed.
Wolrab discloses sealing a forage product such as bales of
hay with “a sealer such as corn oil, soybean oil, digestible
paraffin or plastic in a liquid form” (col. 3, lines 40-42).
Fassauer discloses sealing silage from forage crops with
microcrystalline wax (col. 3, lines 34-42) or a blend of low
molecular weight polyethylene and paraffin wax (col. 5, lines 8-
14), and teaches that oil can be added to the sealant (col. 5,
lines 15-17).
Neither Wolrab nor Fassauer discloses sealing the forage
product using tallow. To remedy this deficiency, the examiner
relies upon the combined teachings of JP ‘752, Evans and
Chandler.
-3-3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007