Appeal No. 1999-0687
Application No. 08/560,315
sustain either of the examiner's rejections.
We consider first the examiner's rejection of claim 36
and the claims dependent thereon over Ohlin in view of
Sipinen.
Appellants are on record as stating that the conventional
tape 20 employed in the process of Ohlin, e.g., a tape sold by
Venture Tape Corp., utilizes a liner in contrast to the tape
utilized in the method of claim 36. Ohlin, itself, is silent
regarding the use of a liner. Also, Ohlin does not disclose
the claimed maximum unwind force. To remedy this deficiency
in Ohlin, the examiner relies upon Sipinen and concludes that
"it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in this
art to employ the tape of Sipinen et al. in the process of
Ohlin in the place of the corresponding, analogous tape
employed therein . . . mere substitution of one known
conformable PSA tape for another
involved" (page 5 of answer). However, as emphasized by
appellants, Sipinen is directed to pressure-sensitive adhesive
tapes that are useful for fasteners on disposable diapers, and
the reference provides no teaching or suggestion that the
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007