Ex Parte Remaks et al - Page 5



            Appeal 2006-2365                                                                              
            Application 10/209,736                                                                        
                  The appellants argue that there is there is no teaching, suggestion, or                 
            motivation to add indicia on the upper surface of the end flaps (51-56) of                    
            Kuchenbecker because these end flaps are internal structural supports for their               
            respective octagonal end panels (42 and 44), and thus, the end flaps are not                  
            externally visible when the container is formed.  Brief, p. 9.  We agree with the             
            appellants’ position.                                                                         
                  As shown in Figure 5, the triangular end flaps (51, 51’, 52, 52’, 54, 54’, 56,          
            and 56’) of Kuchenbecker are inwardly folded such that they underlie and support              
            each of the respective octagonal end panels (42, 44) to form a rigid end to the               
            octagonal prism (col. 3, lines 18-23 and col. 4, lines 54-57).1  We find that the             
            teachings of Watts, Giampapa, and Batchelor, when combined with Kuchenbecker,                 
            would not have led one of ordinary skill in the art to the claimed invention.  Watts          
            relates to a container (19) made from a blank.  Watts discloses that the outside              
            surface of the container is laminated with a sheet of metallic foil and treated to give       
            the appearance of a basket weave (col. 3, lines 23-27).  Watts, similar to                    
            Kuchenbecker, teaches adding a decorative pattern only to the outer surface of the            
            container.  As such, there is no motivation in the combined teachings of Watts and            
                                                                                                         
                  1 We note that Kuchenbecker teaches that the outer surface of the blank (B1)            
            is preferably printed with a decorative pattern for display to the consumer (col. 4,          
            lines 61-63).  Because the end flaps of Kuchenbecker are not externally visible to            
            the consumer, however, we find it speculative to read this disclosure of                      
            Kuchenbecker to teach or suggest printing a decorative pattern on the hidden                  
            portions of the blank.  Rather, we interpret this disclosure of Kuchenbecker to               
            teach or suggest adding decorative printing only on the portion of the blank (B1)             
            that is disposed on the outer surface of the container, and thus visible to the               
            consumer, once the container is formed.                                                       
                                                    5                                                     



Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next

Last modified: September 9, 2013