Appeal 2007-0368
Application 10/178,127
has, between the fold and the interlocking profiles, lines of perforation (17, 18) for
tearing off the fold (14) portion of the zipper strip when the top portion of the bag
is torn off (col. 3, ll. 50-58). Between the bag’s layers and the zipper strip is an air
and moisture impervious cap strip (19) that blocks the perforations to prevent entry
of air or moisture into the bag before it is used (col. 4, ll. 1-10).
The Appellants point out that Van Erden discloses that the zipper strip is
immediately adjacent the fin seal (col. 2, ll. 25-26), and argue that because the
zipper strip is immediately adjacent the fin seal it is not “offset from an interior of
said top of said reclosable container” as required by claim 1 or “offset from said
top of said reclosable container” as required by claim 12 (Br. 5-6). The gap
between the zipper strip’s fold (14) and the lower end of the fin seal (12) in Van
Erden’s Figures 2, 7, and 9 indicates that Van Erden’s term “immediately
adjacent” encompasses an offset, as illustrated, between the inner end of the fin
seal and the zipper strip’s fold. Moreover, regarding claim 12, if “intended to be”
does not require that the loop actually is between the profile members and an
interior of a top of a reclosable container and offset from the top of the reclosable
container, then to anticipate the invention claimed in that claim Van Erden need
not disclose the offset argued by the Appellants.
For the above reasons we are not convinced of reversible error in the
Examiner’s rejections.
DECISION
The rejections of claims 1, 2, 6, 12, 13, and 17-20 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b)
over Van Erden, claims 3-5, 7-10, and 14-16 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Van
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013