Ex parte VAN ROSSEN - Page 7

          Appeal No. 1998-3001                                                        
          Application No. 08/318,645                                                  

          layer, as now particularly claimed, would not have been                     
          suggested by the Gin and Fesco teachings, collectively                      
          considered.  As to the patent to Bosses, we conclude that it                
          does not overcome the deficiency of the Gin and Fesco                       
          disclosures.  More specifically, the Bosses  document, which                
          refers to each of the Gin and Fesco teachings (column 1, lines              
          18 through 37), simply reveals another alternative to the                   
          teachings of the Gin document (melt-blown filter layer                      
          sandwiched between inner and outer layers), i.e., a two-ply                 
          bag wherein a melt-blown filter ply is inside an outer ply                  
          (Fig. 5).                                                                   

               Since the evidence of obviousness would not have been                  
          suggestive of the claimed subject matter, each of the                       
          rejections on appeal under 35 U.S.C.  103 must be reversed.                


Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007