Appeal No. 2001-2229
Application No. 09/346,226
Dixon at column 4, lines 22 through 56). Even though heat
shrinkable films having balanced shrink ratios might be known
in the packaging art, and arguably would have been suggested
by Ashmore, there is nothing in this knowledge per se or in
the combined disclosures of the applied references which would
have motivated the artisan to run counter to the teachings of
Dixon by making the gift bags disclosed therein of a heat
shrinkable film having a balanced shrink ratio. The mere fact
that the prior art could be so modified would not have made
the modification obvious unless the prior art suggested the
desirability of the modification. In re Gordon, 733 F.2d 900,
902, 221 USPQ 1125, 1127 (Fed. Cir. 1984). Here, the prior
art does not contemplate the aesthetic advantage recognized by
the appellants for the balanced shrink ratio recited in claims
1 and 8, or provide any other reason why this feature would
have been desirable in the particular bag disclosed by Dixon.
Hence, the references proffered by the examiner do not
justify a conclusion that the differences between the subject
matter recited in independent claims 1 and 8 and the prior art
are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007