Appeal No. 2001-2225
Application 09/265,647
that the applied prior art does not establish a case of prima
facie obviousness with respect to claims 4, 5 and 23-33. The
rejections of these claims are not affirmed. Our reasons follow.
The following represents our findings as to the scope
and content of the prior art and the difference between the prior
art and the claimed invention. McAdams discloses a flexible
plastic bag kit for installation in a freezer. McAdams attaches
the bag by use of a plurality of magnetic strips 11 placed in a
hem 7, one strip for each edge of the container 1. The flexible
bag may be disposable or reusable. This bag anticipates appel-
lant’s claims 1-3 and 6.
Appellant argues that McAdams does not show a magnetic
strip adapted to hold a first portion of the bag to the hinged
lid of a parts washer. Appellant does not state why the strip of
McAdams could not so function. In our view, it is clear that the
magnetic strip is adapted to hold an edge of a bag to any flat
iron-containing surface. This is all the claims require. The
claims certainly are silent with respect to protecting a hinge.
Note further that it is the magnetic strip that is claimed as
adapted to hold a bag to the cover. Claim 1 does not include a
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007