Appeal No. 2006-1779
Application No. 10/249,810
closure device, wherein the first and second connecting
flaps have outer ends proximal to the gussets, wherein
the outer ends are integrated into the closure seam
portion connecting the front wall and the gussets or the
back wall and the gussets.
The examiner relies upon the following as evidence of unpatentability:
Healy US 6,461,043 B1 Oct. 8, 2002
Takashi EP 834,454 B1 Apr 8, 1998
The following rejection is before us for review.
Claims 1, 2, 4-8, 10-13 and 15-17 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
being unpatentable over Takashi in view of Healy.
Rather than reiterate in their entirety the conflicting viewpoints advanced by
the examiner and the appellants regarding this appeal, we make reference to the
examiner's answer (mailed December 15, 2005) for the examiner's complete
reasoning in support of the rejection and to the appellants’ brief (filed November
25, 2005) and reply brief (filed February 15, 2006) for the appellants’ arguments
thereagainst.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given careful consideration
to the appellants’ specification and claims, to the applied prior art, and to the
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007