Appeal No. 1999-0107
Application No. 08/700,427
As for the 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) rejection of claims 1 through
9, 11 and 14 as being unpatentable over Gouge ‘595 in view of
Gouge ‘601, Gouge ‘595 discloses “a containerization system
comprising at least one inner water soluble bag [110] located
within an outer water soluble bag [120]. Each water soluble bag
independently contains an agrochemical that does not dissolve the
bag, or bags, which it contacts” (column 2, lines 21 through 26).
In addition, each bag preferably is made of a polyvinyl alcohol
film (see column 7, lines 5 through 35).
The “poly-bag” arrangement disclosed by Gouge ‘595 meets
each and every element of the sealed container recited in claim
1. The area of the poly-bag within inner bag 110 constitutes a
sealed container composed of a wall comprising two superimposed,
single layer, homogeneous and water-soluble polymer films in the
form of bag 110 and bag 120, which films are separable without
tearing to the same extent the appellant’s are. Here again, the
appellant’s arguments to the contrary are unconvincing because
they are not commensurate with the actual broad scope of claim 1.
For instance, while the appellant submits that “the double-layer
film of the claimed invention is a unitary structure” (reply
brief, page 6), claim 1 makes no mention of a double-layer film
or a unitary structure. Similarly, the argument that the recited
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007