Appeal No. 2001-1306 Page 13
Application No. 08/100,019
sealed film compartment of the camera as it is advanced and
rewound between the film canister and the right-hand spool.
Therefore, before the second exposures are shot, the roll of film
is in a sealed package and includes a plurality of exposable
photographic frames that are partially exposed leaving exposed
and unexposed portions on each frame. Hence, Guez meets the
broadly recited “sealed package” of film comprising a plurality
of frames having exposed and unexposed portions. Therefore, we
sustain the rejection of independent claim 1 as well as claims 2,
3, 6 and 8, which stand or fall therewith, under 35 U.S.C. § 102
over Guez.
We note that independent claim 17 recites a process for
obtaining developed photographs by removing the film from the
sealed film package of claim 1 and placing it into a camera.
Claim 17 further requires that the partially exposed film frames
be exposed after placement in the camera. We find that Guez, in
contrast, teaches that the film is exposed twice while inside the
camera. Therefore, the film of Guez is not removed from the
sealed package prior to the second exposure and does not
anticipate the invention of independent claim 17 and claims 10
through 14 and 16, dependent thereupon. Additionally, Guez fails
to teach the limitation of the package being of “instant
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007