Appeal No. 2005-1486
Application No. 10/099,423 5
product viewing window is reasonable on its face and not disputed
by the appellants.
Kim discloses a box designed to allow display of and access
to commodities packaged therein, thereby eliminating the need for
a separate display stand for the commodities and the expense and
extra space associated therewith (see column 1, lines 37 through
45). To this end, a front surface plate 11 of box body 10
includes cutting lines 20 defining cut-off portions 30 which can
be detached from the front surface plate to form opening portions
40 which permit the commodities within the box body to be
exhibited, and to be removed from and placed back into the box
(see column 4, lines 7 through 49).
In proposing to combine Welshenbach and Kim to reject claim
1, the examiner submits that it would have been obvious “to
provide a removable panel portion in the carton of Welshenbach
‘610 as taught by Kim ‘288 in order to view the commodities
stored in the interior of the carton and [allow] easier removal
of the commodities from the carton” (answer, page 4).
The appellants contend generally that this proposed
reference combination stems from impermissible hindsight, and
more specifically that the proposed modification of the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007