Appeal No. 1998-2029 Page 13
Application No. 08/258,643
his fluid collection bag does not form a complete fluid tight
seal when the fluid collection bag is sealed by the adhesive
tape is speculation unsupported by any evidence and directly 3
contrary to the specific teachings of Morris that the fluid
collection bag is sealed. In our view, the combined teachings
of the applied prior art would have made it obvious at the
time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill
in the art to have provided Idris's pouch with a closure means
for sealing the pouch in a fluid tight manner.
For the reasons set forth above, the decision of the
examiner to reject claims 1, 2, 4-6, 10 and 11 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 is affirmed.
Claim 3
We sustain the rejection of claim 3 under 35 U.S.C. §
103.
3Attorney's argument in a brief cannot take the place of
evidence. In re Pearson, 494 F.2d 1399, 1405, 181 USPQ 641,
646 (CCPA 1974).
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007