Appeal No. 96-1211
Application 08/173,083
(22) would have to be adjusted to conform to the new shape. Lane provides evidence that
the level of skill in this art was sufficient at the time of the present invention to adapt a given
scheme of adhesive/release agents to a variety of label shapes including quadrate and
non-quadrate shapes.
From the above analysis, it should be clear that we disagree with appellant’s
argument at page 9 of the Appeal Brief that it is necessary to eliminate strips (19) and (22)
from Bane if one is to produce a non-quadrate label using the teachings of that reference.
In our view, one of ordinary skill in the art would simply adjust the size and shape of these
strips to accommodate the non-quadrate shape.
The rejection of claims 13, 14 and 19 is affirmed.
2. Group 2
Claim 15 is representative of this group and requires the additional steps of (d)
separating the die-cut labels from each other and the web, and (e) shingling the labels so
that a portion of the pressure sensitive adhesive on one label engages a portion of an
adjacent label, the shingled labels completely linerless. Appellant argues that the
teachings in Lane are specifically contrary to what is required by claim 15 (Appeal Brief,
paragraph bridging pages 9-10).
It is Bane, not Lane, which describes the shingled format required by claim 15. See
Figure 1 of Bane. Area (26) of the roll of precut labels of Bane is shingled in a manner in
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007