Appeal No. 2006-1371
Application No. 10/323,250
Chacko discloses a multi-pack cigarette package with “a
sleeve having a first pocket for receiving one product pack and
an adjacent second pocket on the other side of the vertical hinge
for receiving one or more additional product packs” (¶ 0001).
“[T]he packaging sleeves 12 are particularly useful for packaging
two or three product packs sold in promotional activities such as
buy one or two packs and get one pack free” (¶ 0023).
The appellants argue: “Carnes is primarily directed to a
dispensing system for a plurality of individual retail packages
while the present invention is directed to an individual retail
package per se. The concepts are entirely different and there is
no suggestion in the prior art for securing the product packs of
an individual retail package [such as that of Evers or Chacko] to
the interior surface of the enclosure forming that package”
(brief, page 5). The appellants stress “that the enclosure of
Evers and Chacko is a single retail unit while Carnes simply
discloses a dispensing system that comprises a plurality of such
retail units individually secured to a support surface” (brief,
page 6). The appellants further argue: “The dispensing system of
Carnes does not suggest securing the product packs of an
individual retail unit inside the enclosure of that unit. At
best Carnes suggests securing the cartons or packaging sleeves of
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007