Appeal No. 98-2123
Application No. 08/326,669
in Grover a portion of pocket 51 forms an open-ended sleeve
that is integrally bound in the card and is adapted to permit
repeated receipt and withdrawal of an elongate functional
member (i.e., spacer 55).
With respect to representative claim 1, the appellants
argue that Grover does not have a sleeve that is adapted to
permit repeated receipt and withdrawal of an elongate
functional member. From the appellants' perspective, once the
card of Grover is laminated, all the parts thereof are
irreversibly heat-bonded together and thereafter no structure
may be repeatedly received and withdrawn. In support of this
position, the reply brief states that:
Grover's statement at column 5, lines 15-17 that:
"[a]lternatively, the microfilm segment or segments
54 may be inserted into the pocket 51 through its
mouth 52 after the front panel is positioned" should
not be misconstrued to mean this occurs after his
card is laminated together. Such microfilm
placement is only suggested as an alternative method
of assembly after the front panel is positioned atop
the other elements, not after it is welded into
place by the laminating process. [Page 3.]
We do not agree with the appellants' interpretation of
the scope and content of Grover. Grover teaches a card 1
having a front panel 15, a back panel 16 and an inner core 2
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007