Ex Parte Zumbuhl

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

May 27, 2004

09925232 (B.P.A.I. May. 27, 2004)

1 Although appellant withdrew claims 1-6 and 10 in the
amendment filed on March 4, 2003 (Paper No. 6), the claims have
not been physically cancelled.
-1-
The opinion in support of the decision being entered
today was not written for publication in a law journal
and is not binding precedent of the Board.
Paper No. 12
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE

BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES

Ex parte BRUNO ZUMBUHL

Appeal No. 2004-1230
Application No. 09/925,232

ON BRIEF

Before KIMLIN, PAK and JEFFREY T. SMITH, Administrative Patent
Judges.
KIMLIN, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is an appeal from the final rejection of claims 7-9,
all the claims remaining in the present application.1 Claim 7 is
illustrative:
7. In a tamper-indicating threaded closure, including a
threaded cap and a tamper-indicating ring which splits at at
least one point on the periphery thereof as said closure is
removed from the container, said ring being interconnected to
Appeal No. 2004-1230
Application No. 09/925,232
-2-
said cap by frangible bridges, said tamper-indicating ring
including a plurality of tabs hingedly interconnected to an inner
surface of said ring, said tabs serving to sever said bridges as
said cap is removed, the improvement comprising: said tabs being
of substantially equal width along the periphery of said ring,
and being separated from each other by spaces at least equal to
the width of said tabs; said ring having first and second
vertically-oriented scores to enable splitting of said ring, said
scores being spaced from each other by a distance at least equal
to the width of said tabs.
The examiner relies upon the following reference as evidence
of obviousness:
Mori et al. (Mori) 4,565,295 Jan. 21, 1986
Appellant's claimed invention is directed to a tamper-
indicating threaded closure of the type used to seal a container.
The closure includes a threaded cap and a tamper-indicating ring.
The ring splits at at least one point on its periphery when the
closure is removed from the container. The ring also includes a
plurality of tabs which engage corresponding beads on the
container, and the ring is interconnected to the threaded cap by
frangible bridges that are severed when the cap is removed.
Appellant's asserted improvement over this admittedly known
tamper-indicating threaded closure is positioning first and
second vertically-oriented scores on the ring, which enable the
splitting of the ring, such that the distance between the scores
is at least equal to the width of the tabs.
Appeal No. 2004-1230
Application No. 09/925,232
-3-
Appealed claims 7-9 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Mori.
Appellant submits at page 3 of the Brief that "[f]or
purposes of the present appeal, all claims stand or fall
together." Accordingly, although appellant includes separate
arguments for claims 8 and 9 at page 6 of the Brief, all the
appealed claims stand or fall together with claim 7, and we will
limit our consideration of this appeal accordingly.
We have thoroughly reviewed each of appellant's arguments
for patentability. However, we are in complete agreement with
the examiner that the claimed subject matter would have been
obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art within the meaning of
§ 103 in view of the applied prior art. Accordingly, we will
sustain the examiner's rejection for essentially those reasons
expressed in the Answer.
Appellant does not dispute the examiner's factual
determination that Mori discloses a tamper-indicating threaded
closure comprising the presently claimed threaded cap and tamper-
indicating ring which splits at at least one point on the
periphery of the ring when the closure is removed from the
container. Also, like appellant's closure, the ring of Mori is
Appeal No. 2004-1230
Application No. 09/925,232
-4-
interconnected to the cap by frangible bridges and contains tabs
which engage the container which serve to sever the frangible
bridges when the cap is removed. Appellant also acknowledges
that the ring of Mori has first and second vertically-oriented
scores which enable splitting of the ring during removal of the
closure.
It is appellant's principal contention that the scores, or
breaking lines 32, of Mori are positioned adjacent each other in
spaced relation smaller than the circumferential width of the
base edge of the tabs. Appellant contends that:
He provides first and second vertically-oriented scores
for splitting the ring, as does Mori, but the scores
are spaced from each other a distance at least equal to
the width of the tabs, thus providing a permanent
bridge of greater arcuate length, reducing the
necessity of performing as many horizontally-oriented
slits which form the remaining severable bridges
[page 5 of Brief, first complete sentence].
We agree with the examiner that appellant's argument is not
supported by the Mori disclosure. In particular, we concur with
the following analysis given by the examiner at page 3 of the
Answer, penultimate paragraph:
As seen in figure 2 of Mori, the tabs 26 have a
width W and are spaced apart by a distance representing
the pitch P of the tabs which is at least equal to the
width of the tabs since P is greater than W. Further,
the vertically oriented first and second scores 32 are
Appeal No. 2004-1230
Application No. 09/925,232
-5-
spaced apart by a distance D. The distance D between
the two vertically oriented scores on the ring is at
least equal to the width of the tabs. Reading at
column 6, lines 47-56 and applying the mathematical
equation therein, the vertically oriented first and
second scores are spaced apart by a distance at least
equal to the width of the tabs.
We note that appellant has not refuted the examiner's analysis
and we are at a loss to understand appellant's argument that the
distance between score lines 32 of Mori is at least equal to the
width of the reference tabs, as required by claim 7 on appeal.
The formula given at column 6 of Mori clearly requires that the
distance between scores 32 (D) be greater than the width of the
tabs 26 (W). Indeed, it would appear that the tamper-indicating
threaded closure of claim 7 is described by Mori within the
meaning 35 U.S.C. § 102.
As a final point, we note that appellant bases no argument
upon objective evidence of nonobviousness, such as unexpected
results.
In conclusion, based on the foregoing, the examiner's
decision rejecting the appealed claims is affirmed.
Appeal No. 2004-1230
Application No. 09/925,232
-6-
No time period for taking any subsequent action in
connection with this appeal may be extended under 37 CFR
§ 1.136(a).
AFFIRMED
EDWARD C. KIMLIN )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
)
)
CHUNG K. PAK ) BOARD OF PATENT
Administrative Patent Judge ) APPEALS AND
) INTERFERENCES
)
)
)
JEFFREY T. SMITH )
Administrative Patent Judge )
ECK:clm
Appeal No. 2004-1230
Application No. 09/925,232
-7-
Charles E. Temko
22 Marion Road
Westport, CT 06880