Appeal No. 95-1859
Application 08/055,100
The appeal is from a decision of the Primary Examiner
rejecting claims 1-4 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over the prior art.
We reverse, make a new ground of rejection of claim 3 under
37 CFR § 1.196(b) and make a recommendation under 37 CFR
§ 1.196(c).
The subject matter on appeal relates to a process to
achieve printing of a non-barrier-layer, peel-off, adhesive
label with a liquid ink having a mineral oil vehicle. The
method is said to result in a label that avoids the expense
and added bulk of a barrier layer because the microporous
print-receiving label is said to prevent the mineral oil
vehicle from reaching the adhesive layer (specification, page
2, lines 7-9; page 3, lines 15-19).
A. Interpretation of the scope of the claims
Prior to evaluating the prior art applied by the
examiner, as well as other art which we found on our own, we
believe it is appropriate to determine the precise scope of
the claims on appeal.
Interpretation of a claim is a question of law. Based on
our evaluation of the claims, when considered in light of
- 2 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007