Appeal No. 2000-0874 Page 8
Application No. 08/695,554
metal," the decision of the examiner to reject claim 26, and
claims 27 to 29 dependent therein, under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is
reversed.
With regard to claim 30, a claim directed to a flat-
rolled sheet metal can body fabricated in accordance with the
process of claim 26 or 27, based on our analysis and review of
Clowes, it is our opinion that Clowes' metal can body clearly
lacks the claimed height (about five inches) and the claimed
diameter (about two and eleven sixteenths inches). In the
rejection before us in this appeal, the examiner has not made
any determination, or provided any evidence, that it would
have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a
person having ordinary skill in the art to have modified
Clowes' metal can body to have a height of about five inches
and a diameter of about two and eleven sixteenths inches.
Accordingly, the decision of the examiner to reject claim 30
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is reversed.3
3In reversing the decision of the examiner to reject
claims 26 to 30 under 35 U.S.C. § 103, we are aware of
Saunders teaching (column 8, lines 16-23) of a making a can
(continued...)
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007