Appeal No. 1997-3520
Application No. 08/357,487
Answer). However, we fully concur with appellants that when
the criticized claim language is read in light of the present
specification, as it must be, one of ordinary skill in the art
would readily understand that "one adhesive layer is disposed
between, and adheres, the barrier core layer to an outermost
layer, and the other adhesive layer is disposed between, and
adheres, the barrier core layer to another outermost layer"
(page 11 of Brief). Likewise, the examiner has not set forth
any compelling line of reasoning which establishes that one of
ordinary skill in the art would not understand the claim
language "both directions" to refer to the longitudinal and
transverse directions of the film.
We now turn to the examiner's rejection under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103. The examiner acknowledges that the applied references,
particularly the primary references of Newsome, are silent
regarding the maximum shrink force of the disclosed heat-
shrinkable film. Notwithstanding this silence, the examiner
concludes that "the film of Newsome would inherently meet the
criterion of 0.5 N/cm since depending upon test sample
dimensions or thickness of the Newsome film it would meet the
limitation as now claimed" (page 5 of Answer). However, the
-6-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007