Appeal No. 97-0774
Application 08/121,525
5 and 6 of the answer. Instead, the body of this claim expressly
recites that the slide is adapted to be moved along the flexible
strand means to drive the sponge members together so that each
sponge member “engages the adjacent sponge body member forming a
rigid nasal pack . . .” This claim recitation cannot be
dismissed or ignored and, instead, must be given effect as a
limitation of the claim. See In re Angdstadt, 537 F.2d 498, 501,
190 USPQ 214, 217 (CCPA 1976) in which the predecessor of our
current reviewing court gave effect to the claim limitation “to
form . . . hydroperoxides.” There is no teaching or suggestion
of a nasal pack in the Schoenholz patent.
For the foregoing reasons, the rejection of appealed claims
1, 2, 8, 10, 11, 18, 26, 29 and 45 cannot stand. The examiner’s
decision rejecting the appealed claims is therefore reversed.
REVERSED
HARRISON E. McCANDLISH )
Senior Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
)
NEAL E. ABRAMS ) BOARD OF PATENT
Administrative Patent Judge ) APPEALS AND
) INTERFERENCES
)
)
JEFFREY V. NASE )
Administrative Patent Judge )
-7-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007