Appeal No. 2001-1884
Application No. 08/718,692
Bradley, Shiraki, Asao and Take.6 We find that Take employs heat
and pressure to unite, inter alia, a paper coated with a low
density polyethylene film, a polyethylene terephthalate film
deposited with a thick silicon oxide layer (by plasma or vacuum
deposition (non-chemical activation)), and a low density
polyethylene film extruded and subjected to a corona discharge
treatment (thermoadhesive resin film) to form a laminate. See
column 9, lines 30-65, together with column 4, lines 44-54,
column 5, lines 3-5, 23-62, column 6, lines 40-50 and column 7,
lines 10-21. The corona discharge treatment is said to improve
adhesion between the polyethylene terephthalate film and the
polyethylene film. See column 5, lines 31-38.
We recognize that Take is silent as to the temperature at
which the polyethylene film is extruded. See Take in its
entirety. However, we find that Asao teaches the importance of
using a polyethylene film extruded from a mixture of high and low
density polyethylenes at the claimed temperature, i.e.,
280-320oC. See page 4. This extruded polyethylene film is
6 For purposes of this rejection, the appellants state that
claims 50, 51, 53-55, 57, 66, 69-71 and 73-75 stand or fall
together with claim 39. See the Brief, page 7. The appellants
state that only claims 67 and 68 should be separately considered
based on their own merits. Id.
12
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007