Appeal No. 2005-0214
Application No. 09/742,653
III. 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection of claims 47 and 48 as being
obvious over Calhoun ‘790 in view of Rusincovitch, and further in
view of Plamthottam
Claims 47 and 48 depend upon claim 31. We also note that on
page 11 of the brief, appellant presents similar arguments for
this rejection (i.e., that the applied references do not teach
adhesive articles including non-adhesive material forms
comprising a polymeric ink that are embedded into the release
liner, even with or below, the upper surface of the release
liner).
Hence, for the same reasons that we affirmed the rejection
of claim 31 as being obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Calhoun
‘790 in view of Rusincovitch, we affirm this rejection.
IV. The 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection of claims 54 and 56-58 as
being obvious over Calhoun ‘790 in view of Rusincovitch and
further in view of Calhoun ‘178
Claims 54 and 56-58 also depend upon claim 31.
Appellant presents similar arguments for this rejection,
i.e., that the applied references do not cure the deficiencies of
Calhoun ‘790 and Rusincovitch regarding an adhesive article
including a non-adhesive material forms comprising a polymeric
ink that are embedded into the release liner even with or below
the upper surface of the release liner.
Hence, for the same reasons that we affirmed the rejection
of claim 31 as being obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Calhoun
‘790 in view of Rusincovitch, we affirm this rejection.
-9-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007