Appeal No. 1997-0674
Application No. 08/214,971
page 4 of the Answer, the examiner has taken the following
positions:
(1) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary
skill in the art to have employed the self
supporting material teaching of Gallo, et. al.,
motivated by the handling requirements and the top
seal teaching of Mains, et. al., motivated by the
intended container contents, in the construction of
the device of Stein, et. al. The method claimed
would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in
the art in light of the intended use.
(2) It is well known and widely accepted to
separately dispose of waste container liners and
contents while retaining the outer container, as in
household waste containers, motivated by the cost
savings.
We do not agree with these conclusions, from which it follows
that we do not agree that the combined teachings of these
three references establish a prima facie case of obviousness
with regard to the subject matter of the appealed claims.
Therefore, we will not sustain the rejection. Our reasoning
follows.
Stein discloses a container for medical waste such as
needles and syringes. It comprises a rigid outer box (10) and
a rigid inner box (30), between which is a flexible plastic
bag (50). These three elements are attached together (column
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007