Appeal No. 1998-2424
Application 08/515,269
container. For this reason, the admitted prior art in view of
Frew or Boston does not establish the prima facie obviousness
of claim 21. With respect to Fortin, we note that Fortin’s
liner is not of sufficient flexibility to permit folding into
a compact form for storage and dispensing. Therefore, the
disclosure of Fortin and the admitted prior art does not
establish the prima facie obviousness of claim 21.
Turning to a consideration of claim 22, the claim is
directed to a liner or sheath for a container. While we note
that the preamble states that such a sheath is for
sterilization of a contaminated appliance in a ultrasonic
cleaning machine, we regard this as only an intended use
limitation that does not give life and meaning to the recited
structure in the body of the claim. The structure of the
sheath in the claim is merely a flexible material that can be
folded and unfolded to be placed in
a container while having bacteriologically impermeability. In
our view, Boston would have rendered such a sheath prima facie
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007