Appeal No. 1999-0758
Application 08/784,180
The obviousness rejection
Claim 2 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over
Solon in view of McKillip
McKillip discloses an air baggage (identification) tag with (machine readable) bar
codes thereon (Fig. 1) and a release liner 22 covering an adhesive material. 2
In our opinion, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art,
from a combined assessment of the teachings of Solon and McKillip, to utilize machine
readable information on the identification bracelet of Solon, following the suggestion
therefor derivable from the teaching of McKillip, to gain the art recognized and self-
evident advantages thereof.
We are not convinced by appellant’s argument (brief, pages 13 through 15) that
the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) is unsound. Notwithstanding appellant’s
conclusion to the contrary (brief, page 13), we determined that the Solon document
teaches the claimed feature of an exposed pressure sensitive adhesive fastener, as
2 It is apparent to us that McKillip is basically being relied on for a teaching of what appellant has
already acknowledged in the background section of the specification (page 3), i.e., bar coding (machine
readable information) on an identification bracelet is a well known expedient in the art.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007