Appeal No. 2006-1088
Application No. 09/974,400
We have thoroughly reviewed each of appellant’s arguments
for patentability. However, we are in complete agreement with
the examiner that the claimed subject matter would have been
obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art within the meaning
of § 103 in view of the applied prior art. Accordingly, we will
sustain the examiner’s rejection for the reasons set forth in
the answer, and we add the following for emphasis only.
There is no dispute that Yeager, like appellant, discloses
a reclosable zipper comprising first and second profile strips
having interlocking members and flanges extending laterally from
the profiles. Also, flange 40 of Yeager is longer than flange
42 and the flanges are connected by a peel seal
. As appreciated by the examiner, Yeager does not teach
the use of a slider to open and close the zipper. However, we
fully concur with the examiner that Thieman evidences the
obviousness of employing a slider to open and close a zipper.
As for the claim limitation that the first and second flanges
extend laterally from one side only of the interlocking member,
we agree with the examiner that not only does Thieman establish
the obviousness of this limitation, but portion 43 of Yeager’s
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007