Ex Parte Andersson et al - Page 2



          Appeal No. 2006-1960                                                        
          Application No. 10/380,877                                                  

               According to appellants, the invention is directed to                  
          packaging laminates of multilayer structures including a core               
          layer, one or more gas barrier layers, one or more liquid tight             
          layers, a binder/adhesive layer and a layer of a lamination or              
          sealing agent, where the lamination agent is a polypropylene with           
          a melting point of above 130°C. (Brief, pages 2-3).  Claim 1 is             
          illustrative of the invention and is reproduced below:                      
                    1. A packaging laminate for a retortable packaging                
               container, comprising a core layer, outer, liquid-tight                
               coatings and a gas barrier disposed between the core                   
               layer and one outer liquid-tight coating, wherein the gas              
               barrier is bonded to the core layer by a layer of a                    
               lamination or sealing agent which has a higher melting                 
               point than a maximum temperature to which the retortable               
               packaging container is to be subjected during a heat                   
               treatment in a retort, and wherein the core layer is a                 
               paper or paperboard layer, wherein the lamination or                   
               sealing agent is a polypropylene with a melting point of               
               above 130°C.                                                           
               The examiner has relied on Kato et al. (Kato), U.S. Patent No.         
          5,527,622, issued Jun. 18, 1996, as the evidence supporting the             
          rejections on appeal (Answer, page 3).  Claims 1, 5-7, and 9-10             
          stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as anticipated by Kato              
          (Answer, page 4).  Claims 1, 4-7, and 9-11 stand rejected under             
          35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Kato (Answer, page 6).              



                                          2                                           




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

Last modified: November 3, 2007