Appeal No. 96-2712
Application 08/313,548
disclosure in Clark (page 1, lines 71-78) regarding the flap
therein and in Coit (page 2, lines 61-72) regarding the
configuration of the ears or tabs (3) therein. In each instance,
it is indicated that the shape of these elements may be of
varying forms so long as they perform their function in a
satisfactory manner, thus, in our view, indicating that the
specific configuration of these elements is well within the skill
of the art.
Based on the foregoing, the examiner's rejections of claims
1, 3 through 5, 9, 11, 19 and 20 based on the teachings of Coit
and Clark or Standal are sustained.
The next of the examiner's rejections for our consideration
is that of claims 1, 10 and 12 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 based on the
combined teachings of Jory and Coit. In this rejection, the
examiner is of the opinion that Jory (e.g., Figure 3) discloses
the claimed invention with the exception that the flap (66) of
Jory is not the sole means for releasably holding the card (14)
against movement out of the corner pockets (formed by slits 20)
in a fourth direction, and that such corner pockets are not L-
shaped, as required in appellants' claim 1 on appeal. However,
12
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007