Appeal No. 95-4033
Application 07/669,125
allow claims 1-37 which are all of the claims in the application. We reverse.
The Claimed Subject Matter
The subject matter on appeal is directed to a multilayered laminate. Claim 1 is representative of
the claimed subject matter and is appended to this opinion.
Prior Art References
The following prior art references are relied upon by the examiner in support of the rejection of the
claims for obviousness:
Smith, Jr. et al. (Smith) 4,273,698 Jun. 16, 1981
Mitchell 4,764,560 Aug. 16, 1988
The Rejection
Claims 1-37 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Smith in view of
Mitchell.2
Opinion
We have carefully considered the entire record in light of the respective positions advanced by
appellants and by the examiner. In doing so, we will not sustain the rejection of the claims for obviousness.
The rejection as set forth in the final rejection included two additional references: Dziark et al. (Patent No.2
4,395,507) and Smith, Jr. et al. (Patent No. 4,308,372). According to the examiner, the rejections based on Dziark or Smith
(Patent No. 4,308,372) in view of Mitchell have been withdrawn (answer: p. 6) leaving only the rejection as stated in this
decision for our consideration.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007