Appeal No. 2001-0401 Page 15
Application No. 09/019,451
appellant's argument that the claimed "second storage shelf"
is not readable on the cooler tray plate 35 of Gonzalez, while
true, does not point out any error in the examiner's
application of the applied prior art to the subject matter of
claim 20.
For the reasons set forth above, the decision of the
examiner to reject claim 20 is affirmed.
Claims 9, 14, 22 and 23
We sustain the rejection of claims 9, 14, 22 and 23 under
35 U.S.C. § 103.
The appellant argues (brief, pp. 16-17) that the subject
matter recited in claims 9, 14, 22 and 23 are not disclosed in
Gonzalez. We do not agree.
The limitation of claims 9, 22 and 23 that the first
storage compartment includes "an access door selectively movable
between an opened position to permit access to said implements
and a closed position to prevent inadvertent spillage of said
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007