Appeal No. 1999-0687
Application No. 08/560,315
that
"is wound into a roll without a liner and exhibits a maximum
unwind force of less than 165 g/cm width" (claim 36). Claim
38, the other independent claim on appeal, does not recite
that the tape is wound into a roll without a liner and does
not refer to
any maximum unwind force. Rather, appealed claim 38 "defines
a tape featuring a multi-layered backing that includes an
outer surface layer and a core layer selected from certain
types of polymers that likewise contributes to realizing the
aforementioned advantages" (page 3 of principal brief).
Appealed claims 36, 41-47, 49-55 and 58 stand rejected
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Ohlin in view
of Sipinen. Claims 38, 48, 57 and 68-72 stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over the stated
combination of references in further view of Ohno.
Upon careful consideration of the opposing arguments
presented on appeal, we find that the prior art applied by the
examiner fails to establish a prima facie case of obviousness
for the claimed subject matter. Accordingly, we will not
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007