Appeal No. 2000-1889
Application No. 08/828,903
To remedy this deficiency, the examiner relies on the
disclosure of Graney. See the Answer, page 4. The examiner
finds (Answer, pages 4 and 5) that:
Graney teaches the packaging of microwaveable products
whereby the multilayer package is first covered with a
perforated layer 12 (that allows pressure to dissipate
during microwaving) and then with a pealable second
layer 13 (that is removed before the product at some
point before the package is placed in a microwave
oven). (Col. 1, lines 42-50). Specifically, this
perforated layer allows for the release of steam and to
prevent "material from leaving the container and
splattering the interior of the microwave oven" (col.
3, lines 44-50).
The examiner’s finding, however, does not provide a
sufficient suggestion or motivation to employ the perforated film
taught in Graney in the package of the type described in Gorlich.
Specifically, the examiner has not pointed to any suggestion in
the applied prior art to demonstrate that the employment of the
perforated film used in a microwave food packaging is useful for
the non-microwave packaging of the type described in Gorlich.2
2 The examiner relies on Watanabe for teaching “the use of [a] permeable
material to produce an oxygen scavenging packet...placed in packaged food.”
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007