Appeal No. 1997-2251
Application 8/251,385
that the reclosure element and annular skirt are in different
sides of the mold, and to remove them from the mold using the
methods of Smirne or Funck. Furthermore, the examiner has not
explained why the knowledge in the art that cable ties
existed, as indicated by Sorensen, together with the applied
references, would have led one of ordinary skill in the art to
apply the Miller process, modified as proposed by the
examiner, to make a cable tie as recited in appellants’ claim
1. The examiner’s argument that Miller’s method is applicable
to making any article of any shape (answer, page 4) appears to
have no factual basis.
Appellants argue that one of ordinary skill in the art
would not have applied the methods of Smirne or Funck to cable
ties because the teeth would have to be distorted to enable
them to be released from the mold, and that if the teeth were
rounded as in the Smirne method, the strap of the cable tie
would not be held in the locking head by the pawl (brief,
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007