Appeal No. 96-1501
Application No. 08/172,517
lids and bodies of containers, a polyolefin composition,
premelting the polyolefin composition, assembling the bottoms,
lids and bodies into containers and subsequently melting the
polyolefin composition. It is our opinion that nothing in the
Appellants0 admitted prior art or in Walker teaches or suggests
utilizing electrodeposited polyolefin to coat the individual
elements of a container, much less premelting the polyolefin
composition, assembling the elements into a container, and
melting the polyolefin composition, all as required by the
process of appealed claim 1. Moreover, even assuming arguendo
that appellants' admissions would have suggested coating the
inside of a container with polyolefin by electrodeposition, like
the appellants, we fail to see how the process of forming the
metal can of Walker would have taught one of ordinary skill in
the art to utilize these admissions to premelt the polyolefin
composition, then assemble the elements, and then melt the
polyolefin composition again to arrive at the process recited in
appealed claim 1. In our view, any relevance which the process
of Walker may have with respect to appellants' claimed process
only becomes apparent, if at all, from a reading of appellants'
disclosure, and not from anything in the applied prior art.
As stated in W.L. Gore & Assocs., Inc. v. Garlock, Inc.,
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007