Appeal No. 1998-2314 Page 9
Application No. 07/902,957
microwave energy to the popcorn. While Watkins and Bohrer teach the use of susceptors,
neither of them alleviate the fundamental problem with the basic combination of
references, and we will not sustain the rejection of claim 28.
Independent claim 38 recites a microwave popcorn package comprising, inter alia,
artistic panels bonded together at their edges to form a sealed container having a three-
dimensional appearance of an animal when inflated, a tray having a floor and walls bonded
to the artistic panels, and susceptor material within the tray. Although it does not include
the graphic material on the external shape, claim 38 requires that the shape be in the form
of an animal, and it therefore is our view that the rejection suffers from the same lack of
suggestion to modify Brandberg ‘045 that was explained above with regard to claim 1.
This deficiency is not overcome by Watkins or Bohrer. The rejection of claim 38 is not
sustained.
Claims 25 and 32 add to claims 16 and 26, respectively, gripping tabs for
facilitating access to the popcorn in the container when it is fully inflated. Larson was
added to the references cited against the independent claims from which claims 25 and
32 depend for its teaching of providing such tabs on microwave popcorn containers.
Larson does not, however, overcome the problem in the basic combination of references,
and therefore we shall not sustain the rejection of claims 25 and 32.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007