Appeal No. 2006-1300
Application No. 08/203,672
Graham is unpersuasive. Therefore, we shall sustain the
standing 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) rejection of claim 20 as being
anticipated by Graham.
We also shall sustain the standing 35 U.S.C. § 102(b)
rejection of dependent claims 21-23 as being anticipated by
Graham since the appellants have not challenged such with
any reasonable specificity, thereby allowing these claims
to stand or fall with parent claim 20 (see In re Nielson,
816 F.2d 1567, 1572, 2 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1987)).
II. The 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) rejection of claims 25 and 26 as
being anticipated by Yanase ‘104
Yanase ‘104 pertains to bags for the preservation of
breast milk. For purposes of the rejection, the examiner
focuses on the particular bag 1 illustrated in Figures 1-
10.
Bag 1 comprises upper and lower surfaces 7 and 8
formed by a transparent, flattened, tubular plastic film,
welding portions or seals 3 closing the open edges of the
tubular film, and notches 9 in the welding portions 3
adjacent one end of the bag (in use the upper end of the
bag). The notches delineate a tear strip that can be
removed to open the bag for the receipt of milk. Before it
is opened, the bag defines a hermetically sealed structure
that can be sterilized by irradiation. The bag also
9
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007