Appeal 2006-2924
Application 10/668,522
would appear to satisfy the “securement” limitation of claim 11. Moreover,
provision of a hook and loop fastener, as taught by Prescott, to removably
secure the UV LED flashlight to Solomon’s greeting card would not present
the type of invitation to unwanted intrusion that Solomon seeks to avoid
(FF3). Specifically, removal and storage of the UV LED flashlight in a
location remote from the stationery or greeting card, leaving only one
portion of a hook and loop fastener on the stationery or card, would not
readily inform a would-be intruder of the existence of the UV light source or
the presence of the UV ink writing.
In light of the above, Appellants’ arguments fail to demonstrate that
the Examiner erred in concluding that the combined teachings of Solomon,
Ristow, Funk, and Prescott would have suggested the subject matter of claim
11. The rejection of claim 11, as well as claims 2 and 7 standing or falling
with claim 11, is sustained.
11
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013