Ex Parte Gelardi - Page 12



          Appeal No. 2004-1302                                                        
          Application No. 09/789,757                                                  

                                    Rejection (3)                                     
               Claims 1-7, 15, 18, 20, 21, 25, 26, 29, 34-37, 39 and 44-46            
          stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as being anticipated by             
          Gelardi.                                                                    
               Gelardi is directed to a CD package having a cover                     
          1 attached to a tray 3 by a hinge (e.g., element 49 in Figure               
          12A) at one end of the tray.  The tray comprises a generally                
          planar base (element 125 in Figures 50A, 50B) having a hole                 
          65 circumscribed by recesses 121, 123 (see Figures 45A, 45C and             
          48A) on opposite sides of the base.  The hole receives one or two           
          rosettes (see Figures 46A-46C), each rosette having flexible                
          petals 135 for engaging the center opening of a CD to hold the CD           
          in place.  The recesses 121, 123 circumscribing the hole receive            
          the bases of the rosettes to prevent lateral movement of the                
          rosettes (column 10, lines 52-55; Figures 48A-48C).                         
               As noted above, claim 1 calls for, among other things, a               
          molded tray, a well in the tray, and a rigid boss in the well.              
               In rejecting claim 1 as being anticipated by Gelardi, the              
          examiner considers that Gelardi’s hole 65 corresponds to the                
          claimed boss.  In general, words in a claim will be given their             
          ordinary and accustomed meaning, unless it appears that the                 
          inventor used them differently, Envirotech Corp. v. Al George,              
                                         12                                           




Page:  Previous  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007