Appeal No. 2000-0522
Application No. 08/934,826
REMAND TO THE EXAMINER
Pursuant to 37 CFR § 1.196(e), we remand this application to the examiner to consider, on the
record, whether the teachings of Erickson would have provided suggestion to one of ordinary skill in
the art to modify the Akai package to arrive at the claimed invention. Erickson (column 1, lines 6-9),
like Akai (translation, pages 3 and 5), is directed to a plastic package or bag capable of standing up by
itself before, during and after being filled. Moreover, Erickson (Figures 7 and 8) specifically teaches,
for an approximate 6 cup capacity, a preferred height of 6 inches, a preferred width of 10 inches and a
preferred gusset height of 2 inches (thereby rendering the larger width of the rectangular flat bottom
approximately 6 inches with the bottom wall expanded). For a 2.9 cup capacity, Erickson teaches a
bag having a 5 inch height, an 8 inch width and a gusset height of 2 inches (thereby rendering the larger
width of the rectangular flat bottom approximately 4 inches with the bottom wall expanded) to be
particularly stable (column 8, lines 4-16). In the case of the 6 cup capacity bag taught by Erickson, the
height-to-width ratio is 1, while, in the case of the 2.9 cup capacity, the ratio is 1.25. The examiner
should consider whether these teachings would have provided suggestion to one of ordinary skill in the
art at the time of the appellant's invention to make the Akai package so as to have a height of 6 inches
and larger bottom width of 6 inches, for a 6 cup capacity, or a height of 5 inches and a larger bottom
width of 4 inches, for a 2.9 cup capacity, so as to produce stable packages having such capacities.
Such packages would have a height-to-width ratio within the claimed range and, thus, would also
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007