Appeal No. 2005-0067
Application No. 08/853,842
Under these circumstances, we cannot uphold the examiner’s
rejection of appealed claims 8, 9, 24, 25, 27, and 28.
As to the rejection of appealed claims 18, 26, and 29, we
adopt the examiner’s reasoning (answer at 5-6) as our own.
While the appellants argue that neither DE ’283 nor DE ’070
discloses “a self-supporting preform” (appeal brief at 26; reply
brief filed Jul. 6, 2004, pages 6-7), it would have been readily
apparent to one of ordinary skill in the art that upon joining
the ends of the sheet material with adhesive tape, the resulting
structure would be self-supporting.
In summary, we reverse the rejection under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) of appealed claims 8, 9, 24, 25, 27, and 28 as
unpatentable over DE ’283 or DE ’070 in view of JP ’916, Corn,
and WO ’081. We affirm, however, the examiner’s rejection under
35 U.S.C. § 103(a) of appealed claim 18, 26, and 29 as
unpatentable over DE ’283 or DE ’070 in view of Corn and WO
’081.
The decision of the examiner is therefore affirmed in part.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007