Appeal No. 1998-0299
Application No. 08/301,523
(Fed. Cir. 1987); In re King, 801 F.2d 1324, 1325, 231 USPQ 136, 137 (Fed. Cir.
1986); In re Sernaker, 702 F.2d 989, 991, 217 USPQ 1, 3 (Fed. Cir. 1983). We start
our analysis with claim 15.
We have thoroughly reviewed each of the arguments for patentability
contained in the Examiner’s Answer and Supplemental Examiner’s Answers as well
as in Appellants’ Brief and Reply Briefs. We are in agreement with the Examiner
that the claimed subject matter is anticipated or obvious within the meaning of
§§ 102 and 103 in view of the applied prior art. Accordingly, we will affirm the
Examiner’s rejection of claims 15 to 23, 25 to 29 and 31 to 34.
We find Oberle is directed to a biaxially oriented multi-layered film which
comprises food contact layer, abuse layers and barrier layers. (Col. 4, ll. 5 to 15).
The food contact layer comprises a polyamide composition which has been subject to
energetic radiation. (Col. 4, ll. 18 to 30). According to Oberle, the energetic
radiation provides food adhering properties to the food contact layer. (Col. 5, ll. 7 to
14). Oberle discloses the irradiation of the food contact layer can occur
simultaneously with the irradiation of the overall multilayer structure. (Col. 5, ll. 14
to 18). Oberle further describes a multilayered film which comprises a food
contact layer containing a polyamide, layer A, a barrier layer comprising EVOH,
-4-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007