Ex Parte Kannankeril et al

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Mar 27, 2013

10858803 (P.T.A.B. Mar. 27, 2013)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARKOFFICE
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark Office
Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
www.uspto.gov
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO.
10/858,803 06/02/2004 Charles Kannankeril D-30200-02 5665
28236 7590 03/27/2013
LAW DEPARTMENT
SEALED AIR CORPORATION
P.O. BOX 464
DUNCAN, SC 29334
EXAMINER
GOFF II, JOHN L
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
1746
MAIL DATE DELIVERY MODE
03/27/2013 PAPER
Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________________

BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
____________________

Ex parte CHARLES KANNANKERIL, MIKE METTA, and
BOB O'DOWD
____________________

Appeal 2012-002359
Application 10/858,803
Technology Center 1700
____________________

Before RICHARD E. SCHAFER, CATHERINE Q. TIMM, and
GRACE KARAFFA OBERMANN, Administrative Patent Judges.

TIMM, Administrative Patent Judge.

DECISION ON APPEAL
STATEMENT OF CASE
Appellants appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the Examiner’s
decision to reject claims 21, 23, 25, 27-29, and 31-44. We have jurisdiction
under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
We AFFIRM.

App
App

rejec
of K
lami
shipp
to pa
repro

1 Sch
2 Ka
3 Jon
Euro
Derw
4 Lar
5 Mc
6 The
al. (U
eal 2012-0
lication 10
Appellan
ted under
awakami2
Claim 2
nated artic
ed to a pa
ck goods
duced bel

ornstheim
wakami, U
kanski, DE
pean Paten
ent abstra
son, US 4
Cormack
Examine
S 6,057,0
02359
/858,803
ts’ argum
35 U.S.C.
and Jonka
1 is directe
le, e.g., bu
cker uninf
for shippin
ow, depict

er, US 3,0
S 4,657,6
2 232 70
t Office (
ct accomp
,096,306, p
et al., US 5
r is no lon
24), or Cu
ents focus
§ 103(a) a
nski3 or La
d to an int
bble film
lated, and
g (Spec. ¶
s an embo

70,481, pa
25, patente
4, patente
machine tr
anying the
atented Ju
,882,769,
ger relying
rro et al. (
2
on the rej
s obvious
rson4 and
egrated pr
or cushion
inflated im
¶ [0002] a
diment of
tented De
d Apr. 14
d Jan. 31,
anslation)
foreign la
n. 20, 197
patented M
upon Bra
US 6,884,
ection of c
over Scho
optionally
ocess for m
material,
mediately
nd [0029])
the inflata
c. 25, 1962
, 1987.
1974 (as tr
). We also
nguage do
8.
ar. 16, 19
un (US 4,
494) (Ans
laim 21. C
rnstheimer
McCorm
aking an
which can
before be
. Figure 1
ble lamina
.
anslated b
rely upon
cument.
99.
668,566),
. 4).
laim 21 i
1 in view
ack5.6
inflatable
be
ing used
3
ted article

y the
the
Mleziva et
s
:

App
App

(Spe
surfa
show
Diag
eal 2012-0
lication 10
Dia
The lam
c. ¶ [0049
ce pattern
Figure 2
n at 16. F
rammatic
02359
/858,803
grammatic
inate 20 ha
]). The he
of a roller
depicts th
igure 2 is
view of an
10A
view of a
(Spec. ¶
s a heat se
at sealed p
16 used in
e laminati
reproduce
embodim
(Spec. ¶¶
3
section of
¶ [0010] a

aled porti
ortion 40
the lamin
ng process
d below:
ent of the
[0010] an
an inflata
nd [0049]
on 40 and
correspond
ating proc
with raise
laminate m
d [0013])
ble article
)
unsealed p
s to the ra
ess (id.).
d surface
anufactur

ortion 41
ised
roller
ing system

Appeal 2012-002359
Application 10/858,803

4

Claim 21 is reproduced below with reference numerals from Figure 2
to illustrate the process and with emphasis on the portions of the claim at
issue in the appeal:
Claim 21: An integrated process for making an inflatable
laminated article, comprising the steps of:
(A) extruding a first flat film [12] and a second flat film
[13];
(B) cooling the first flat film [12] and the second flat film
[13] so that the first and second flat films [12, 13] will not fuse
to one another upon contact with each other;
(C) heating selected portions of the first flat film [12] to a
temperature above a fusion temperature, by passing the first flat
film [12] in a partial wrap around a heated roller [16] having a
raised surface and a recessed surface, wherein portions of the
raised surface are separated by the recessed surface;
(D) contacting the first flat film [12] with the second flat
film [13] after the first flat film [12] passes a point of initial
contact with the heated roller [16], with the first flat film [12]
being between the heated roller [16] and the second flat film
[13], while the second flat film [13] remains cooled so that it
will not fuse to portions of the first flat film [12] that remain
cooled, so that the first flat film [12] and the second flat film
[13] are heat sealed to one another at a selected area to make
the inflatable laminated article while the first flat film [12] and
the second flat film [13] are in flat contact with one another,
with an unsealed area of the first flat film [12] being in contact
with an unsealed area of the second flat film [13] during
sealing, with the selected area providing a heat seal pattern
corresponding with the raised surface which provides inflatable
chambers and connecting channels between the first flat film
[12] and the second flat film [13], the unsealed area
corresponding with the recessed surface; and
Appeal 2012-002359
Application 10/858,803

5
(E) winding up or transporting the first and second flat
films [12, 13] after they are heat sealed to one another, with the
inflatable chambers uninflated.
(Claims App’x at Br. 28-29.)
OPINION
Because Appellants focus their arguments on claim 21, we select that
claim as representative for resolving the issues on appeal. The dispositive
issue is: Have Appellants identified a reversible error in the Examiner’s
finding that the prior art as a whole provides a suggestion for supplying two
films in cool condition to the nip of Schornstheimer and heating
Schornstheimer’s raised surface roller to provide the heat necessary to
laminate portions of the film to the other film?
Having considered the evidence and arguments set forth by the
Examiner and Appellants in the Answer and Briefs, we answer this question
in the negative and, therefore, affirm the Examiner’s decision to reject the
claims.
There is no dispute that Schornstheimer discloses methods of making
an inflatable article in which a first flat film (13 or 13’) is passed in a partial
wrap around a roller (18 or 18’) having a raised surface 20 and recessed
surface 19 as shown in Figures 1, 2, and 7 reproduced below:
App
App

Sch
E

lami
the l
alrea
film
eal 2012-0
lication 10
ematic rep
levational
Figure
In Schor
nated agai
amination
dy heated
13’ and 15
02359
/858,803
resentatio
(Schornsth
view of ro
7 (Schorn
nstheimer
nst a calen
takes plac
state (col.
’ are supp
n of two em
eimer, co
ll 18, whic
stheimer,
’s Figure 1
dered film
e immedia
3, ll. 34-3
lied by rol
6
bodimen
l. 2, ll. 21-
h is analo
col. 2, ll. 2
embodim
15 (col. 2
tely after c
9). In the
ls and at l
ts of Scho
23 and ll.
gous to th
4-28; col
ent, a pref
, l. 71 to c
alenderin
Figure 7 e
east one fi
rnstheimer
42-44)

e roll 18’ s
. 4, ll. 56-6
ormed film
ol. 3, l. 19
g, the film
mbodimen
lm must b
’s process
hown in
2)
13 is
). Becaus
15 is in an
t, both
e heated to

e

Appeal 2012-002359
Application 10/858,803

7
allow the desired portions to be laminated (col. 4, ll. 43-66).
Schornstheimer discloses that
Defined in its broadest aspects, the method of this
invention comprises laminating together two sheets or films of
thermoplastic material with an inflation chamber therebetween
resulting from union of the sheets or films only in the regions
surrounding the chamber. This is achieved by superposing the
sheets or films and exerting pressure thereon while at least one
of the sheets or films is in a hot, plastic condition, the pressure
being applied substantially concomitantly with the
superposition through the agency of cooperating rigid and
resilient surfaces at least one of which has recesses
corresponding in configuration with that of the desired inflation
chamber in the completed article. Hence laminating pressure is
exerted only upon the portions of the sheets or films externally
of the desired inflation chamber and the portions of the sheets
or films within the margins of the inflation chamber are not
adhered so that these portions of the sheets or films form the
walls of the chamber.
(Schornstheimer, col. 2, ll. 45-62 (emphasis added).)
The key point is that at least one film must be in a heated state while
the laminating pressure is applied in order to laminate the films together at
the raised regions of the roll 18 or 18’ (col. 2, ll. 49-57; col. 3, ll. 34-46; col.
4, ll. 54-74). Schornstheimer, in the Figure 1 embodiment, supplies the heat
by performing the lamination immediately after forming the film 15 by
calendering with heated calender roll 16 (col. 3, ll. 11-19). Film 13 may also
be heated “by any suitable means as for example, by radiant heaters, not
shown, or by the application of a heated fluid to the interiors of the feed rolls
14.” (col. 3, ll. 39-43.) In the Figure 7 embodiment, both films are supplied
cold and film 15’ heated by heated rolls 33 and 35, and if desired, film 13’ is
Appeal 2012-002359
Application 10/858,803

8
heated “by suitable means not shown, prior to contacting film 15’.” (col. 4,
ll. 54-74).
Schornstheimer provides evidence that it was known in the art to
apply heat to either one film or both by various methods before laminating in
the nip.
In the specific embodiments of Figures 1 and 7, Schornstheimer
teaches supplying the heat to the film by heating rolls 33 and 35 rather than
heating the roll with the raised portions (roll 18 or 18’). The Examiner finds
that Jonkanski describes sealing films in a nip between a heated roller
having a raised surface pattern (8) and a roller having a smooth or raised
pattern (9) and Larson also teaches sealing in a nip between heated rollers
(Ans. 7). The Examiner also finds that
It is further considered extremely well taken across the art of
bonding two thermoplastic layers at spaced apart areas by
passing the layers through a nip between a roller having a raised
surface pattern and a second roller to heat either or both of the
rollers to form a bond between the two layers which bond
corresponds to the raised surface pattern as evidenced by
McCormack.
(Ans. 7, citing McCormack, col. 6, ll. 25-57.)
The evidence supports the findings of the Examiner (Jonkanski, Figs.;
Machine Translation (extruded film blown, flattened, cooled and then passed
around heated pressing roller 8 with roller 8 or both rollers 6 and 8 having a
profile); Derwent Abs. (one or both rollers being profiled and heated);
Larson, col. 4, ll. 26-40 (describing heating two preformed films by various
alternative means including between heated rotating members);
McCormack, Fig. 3 (applying heat to one or both bonding rolls 30 to
Appeal 2012-002359
Application 10/858,803

9
laminate a film to a nonwoven material)). Moreover, Schornstheimer
broadly suggests that either of the rolls forming the nip may have the
recesses (Schornstheimer, col. 2, ll. 49-57), which suggests placing the
raised portions on heated roll 33 instead of roll 18 or 18’.
The prior art as a whole suggests that those of ordinary skill in the art
understood that laminating requires that at least one film be in a heated state
in the portions to be bonded and that either film can be so heated by any of a
number of various methods including by heating a raised surface roller used
to create a nip at which bonding is to take place.
We do not find Appellants’ arguments, which seek to confine the
teachings of the prior art references to their specific embodiments without
taking into account the knowledge and capabilities of those of ordinary skill
in the art as evidenced by the references, persuasive.
CONCLUSION
We sustain the Examiner’s rejections.
DECISION
The Examiner’s decision is affirmed.
TIME PERIOD FOR RESPONSE
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a)(1).

AFFIRMED

cam