Appeal No. 2005-0214
Application No. 09/742,653
V. The 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection of claims 60-62, 66-72 and 74
as being obvious over Calhoun ‘790 in view of Torobin
We consider claim 60 in this rejection. Claim 60 recites,
inter alia, “a pattern of vacuum metallized or sputtered deposits
of non-adhesive material forms embedded into the release surface
of the release liner, said non-adhesive material forms having a
top surface.”
On page 13 of the brief, appellant disputes that Torobin
teaches microspheres that are vacuum metallized or sputtered. In
fact, appellant asserts that the microspheres in Torobin are not
vacuum metallized or sputtered; rather, the inner volume of the
microspheres can contain a high vacuum produced by condensing a
metal vapor, used to blow the microspheres, and refers to column
5, lines 64-68 of Torobin. Appellant states there are no
teachings whatsoever of vacuum metallized or sputtered
microspheres or deposits. Brief, page 13.
However, we emphasize that claim 60 recites a pattern of
non-adhesive material forms. These non-adhesive material forms
are vacuum metallized or sputtered deposits.
Calhoun ‘790 teaches that the non-adhesive material forms
are particles that are uniformly distributed. See column 3,
lines 11-32. Example 1 indicates that the forms are “flood
coated”. See column 9, lines 15-25. The resultant article of
Calhoun includes non-adhesive material forms embedded into the
top release layer of a release liner. See Figure 1. The
material can be polymeric or metallic. See column 3, lines 30-
33.
Hence, appellant’s claimed article of claim 60 reads on the
resultant article of Calhoun, even if the non-adhesive material
forms are produced in a variety of ways (by flood coating
(Calhoun) or by being vacuum metallized or sputtered (claim 60)).
See In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 697, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir.
-10-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007