Appeal No. 1998-0254
Application No. 08/511,257
OPINION
We have carefully reviewed the rejections on appeal in light of the arguments of the
appellant and the examiner. As a result of this review, we have reached the determination
that the applied prior art does not establish a prima facie case of obviousness with
respect to the claims on appeal. Therefore, the rejections of all claims on appeal are
reversed. Our reasons follow.
Turning first to the rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. §103 as obvious over
Horrocks, we find ourselves in agreement with the appellant that Horrocks does not show a
lid member defining a slot that extends inwardly from the peripheral edge. We are of the
view that it is reasonable to interpret the expression "extends inwardly from said peripheral
edge" as requiring the slot to start at the peripheral edge. Horrocks, and all other applied
references for that matter, show material between the peripheral edge of the lids and the
slot. This alone is a sufficient finding to obviate the rejection of claim 1. However, we
further note that the examiner has stated that it would have been obvious to make the
Horrocks container of at least three gallons and make the slot in the lid of the dimensions
claimed by appellant. The examiner has provided no incentive, suggestion or motivation
for such changes. In fact, the examiner states that
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007