Appeal No. 97-1872
Application 08/371,620
As to the standing rejection of claim 14 as being
anticipated by Instance ‘686, considering the claimed upper
panel as corresponding to one of the panels 6, 8, 10, 12 of
Instance ‘686 and the lower panel which is separate from the
upper panel as being the support web 26 of Instance ‘686,
Instance ‘686 does not anticipate claim 14 because the upper
panel (any one of the panels 6, 8, 10 and 12) does not extend
beyond the lower panel (support web 26). Alternatively, if
the support web 26 of Instance ‘686 in conjunction with the
release material 73 is considered to read on the claimed
“release material,” Instance ‘686 still does not anticipate
claim 14 because the “lower panel being separate from the
upper panel” requirement of claim 14 cannot be read on the
panels of Instance ‘686 that are unitary in the sense that
they are joined together by fold lines 14, 16 and 18.
Independent claims 22 and 26 in effect call for a self-
adhesive label comprising a support web carried on a release
material, and a folded sheet disposed on the support web
having a free outer edge extending past the support web and
over the backing of release material so that the free outer
edge is adhered to the release material. This limitation is
-7-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007