Appeal No. 1998-0080
Application No. 08/177,763
Schmidt of connecting additional webs in the transverse
direction. Appellants also argue that whatever advantage is
alleged to be gained by the use of Schmidt’s adhesive strips
does not apply for the claimed polarizer labeling tape. Thus,
appellants urge there is no motivation to combine Schmidt’s
teachings with the admitted prior art. Appellants
additionally argue that the only basis for combining the
teachings of Schmidt with the admitted prior art is based on
an improper attempt to reconstruct appellants’ invention in
hindsight. Finally, appellants argue that Schmidt does not
relate to the art of liquid crystal displays and does not
relate
to the problem solved by the invention so that Schmidt is not
analogous art [brief, pages 7-10].
The examiner responds that the connection in Schmidt
can be considered to be longitudinal along the horizontal
direction. The examiner also responds that Schmidt teaches
the obviousness of splicing releasable strips together in
order to increase the overall length or width of the
releasable strip and that it would have been obvious to make
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007