Appeal No. 96-1997
Application No. 08/176,614
With this as background, we have carefully analyzed appealed
claim 8, comparing it with the receptacle and method disclosed in
the patent to Clement and taking into account the positions
advanced by both the examiner and the appellant. It is apparent
that the method of assembly of the receptacle of Clement, using
the collar or ring member 20 and blank 10 depicted in Figures 1
through 3, and their use with a flower pot as disclosed in column
2, lines 67 through 69, is quite similar to the method recited in
appealed claim 8.
However, we agree with the appellant's position expressed in
the paragraph spanning pages 2 and 3 of the reply brief that
appealed claim 8 requires
that the collar and pot are first provided,
then the collar is secured to the pot, and
finally the sheet is shaped about both the
pot and collar,
and we so interpret appealed claim to require the above sequence
of steps. Consequently, even assuming arguendo that the step of
"securing said collar on the outer peripheral surface of said
flower pot" reads on the use of the assembled receptacle with a
flower pot to retain it securely against shifting as asserted by
the examiner, we must further agree with the appellant's position
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007