Appeal No. 2002-1643 Page 10
Application No. 09/140,700
(3) determined that Jacobson discloses a slider (82) for a slide fastener;
(4) concluded that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to
provide a slider for the slide fastener in Murphy to provide a tighter seal of the
continuous strips than that provided by applying side pressure manually as taught by
Jacobson; and
(5) stated that with regard to the recitation of a number of solvents that the sheets may
be impregnated with Murphy does not disclose the particular solvents, but does
disclose the same wall structure of the dispensing pouch for which the appellant claims
is suitable for housing sheets containing such solvents. The examiner further stated
that if the appellant's claimed wall construction is capable of holding the claimed
solvents, it naturally follows that the same wall construction disclosed by Murphy is
capable of holding the solvents as well and since the structure disclosed by Murphy is
fully capable of performing the appellant's intended use, it meets the claim.
The appellant argues (brief, pp. 17-19) that the "solvent limitation" set forth in
independent claim 24 (i.e., the cleaning liquid absorbed in the wipers is selected from
the group consisting of isopropyl alcohol, MPK, MEK, acetone, naphtha and aromatic
hydrocarbons) is not taught or suggested by the applied prior art (i.e., Murphy and
Jacobson).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007