Appeal 2006-2800
Application 10/151,388
The Appellants provide no reasoning as to why the applied references
would not have fairly suggested, to one of ordinary skill in the art, using La
Pierre’s tear bead to initiate tearing along Weeks’ perforated lines of tearing.
It reasonably appears that La Pierre’s disclosure that the tear bead is
effective for initiating tearing between perforated lines (col. 8, ll. 61-68)
would have fairly suggested, to one of ordinary skill in the art, using the tear
bead instead of or in addition to Weeks’ notch (36) for initiating tearing
between Weeks’ perforated lines of tearing (22, 24). As indicated by
Weeks’ figures 1 and 5, the tear bead necessarily would be on the side of the
base layer (14) opposite the film (12) having the perforated lines of tearing.
We therefore are not convinced of reversible error in the Examiner’s
rejection.
DECISION
The rejection of claims 1, 3-6 and 8 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over
Weeks in view of La Pierre is affirmed.
AFFIRMED
vsh
DAY PITNEY LLP
7 TIMES SQUARE
NEW YORK, NY 10036-7311
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4
Last modified: September 9, 2013