Ex Parte Caudle - Page 3

            Appeal No. 2006-1481                                                    
            Application No. 09/846,714                                              

            pouch of the same shape for holding fluid but does not                  
            specifically teach the pouch wherein the peripheral edges               
            are joined by heat sealing.                                             
                 Hubbard teaches that it is known in the art of sealed              
            pouches (e.g. bladders, thermal packs etc.) to form a pouch             
            by heat sealing together two flat sheets along their outer              
            peripheral edges (Col. 5 lines 55-60).                                  
                 Examiner argues that it would have been obvious to one             
            of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention               
            to have incorporated heat sealing as taught by Hubbard in               
            the hot water bottles of Campbell given the teaching by                 
            Hubbard that such sealed edges provide “integral                        
            construction” (Col. 5 line 59) which would necessarily                  
            result in a leak proof, or at least leak resistant,                     
            peripheral seam (answer, page 4).                                       
                 Appellant argues in the brief (page 10) that: (1)                  
            Campbell does not disclose lateral edges comprising heat                
            seals thus precluding motivation to combine with Hubbard;               
            and that (2) Campbell does not disclose substantially                   
            S-shaped edges to the degree claimed.                                   
                 Appellant’s argument that a lack of heat sealing in                
            Campbell prevents combination with Hubbard is without                   
            merit.  Obviousness-type rejection does not require that                

                                         3                                          


Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007