Appeal 2007-2967
Application 10/274,827
single composite film in which the layers have distinct thermal properties,
i.e., distinct melting points as opposed to a polymer blend with a single or
depressed melting point” (id.). In a preferred embodiment of the claimed
invention the individual film layers are copolymers of polyethylene or
polypropylene with another comonomer such as vinyl acetate or methyl
acrylate. (Id. at 2.)
Anticipation
Claims 1-2, and 13 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as
anticipated by Bozich.
The Examiner finds Bozich discloses a
packaged hot melt adhesive comprising a hot melt adhesive
encased in a thermoplastic multi-layer film comprising two
thermoplastic layers (26a and 27a) which have different melting
points (by the fact they can comprise different materials, see
column 3, … lines 43-50 and column 4, line 56 through column
5, line 11). … [T]wo layers (26a and 27a) are disclosed.
(Answer 4-5.)
Bozich indicates that the two film layers used in processing the
hot melt adhesive on a conveyorized belt may be different. (Bozich,
col. 2, ll. 55-65; col. 3, ll. 43-45.) In Bozich the film layers may also
be the same material, but of different thicknesses. (Bozich, col. 5, ll.
32-43.)
The standard under § 102 is one of strict identity. "Under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102, every limitation of a claim must identically appear in a single prior art
reference for it to anticipate the claim." Gechter v. Davidson, 116 F.3d
1454, 1457, 43 USPQ2d 1030, 1032 (Fed. Cir. 1997). "Every element of the
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013