Appeal No. 2003-0673
Application 09/795,307
O’Malley’s container supports 26) to hold the bin in place.
These drawing figures also provide reasonable support for the
examiner’s determination that each of O’Malley’s trash container
supports 26, with its rectangular horizontal retainer 27 and
vertical retainer 28, embodies “an opening with sides that extend
into the frame of the cart and are slanted inwardly and
downwardly” as recited in claim 8, and that each of O’Malley’s
trash containers 29 embodies “sides that engage the sides of the
holding frame portion in which mounted which the sides of the
recycle bin being configured to complement the inwardly and
downwardly slanted side of the holding frame portion” as also
recited in claim 8. Thus, the appellant’s position that the
subject matter recited in claim 8 distinguishes over that
disclosed by O’Malley by virtue of the foregoing claim
limitations is not persuasive.
We shall therefore sustain the standing 35 U.S.C. § 102(b)
rejection of claim 8 as being anticipated by O’Malley.
II. The 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) rejection of claims 5 through 7
Claim 5 depends from claim 8 and requires the handle to have
an upper horizontally disposed portion and two lower vertically
disposed portions having lower ends mounted in holes within the
frame. Claim 6 depends from claim 5 and further defines the
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007