Appeal No. 95-1747
Application 08/047,994
contacting surfaces (43) of the apparatus in Gibilisco, read by
the examiner as being the puncture mechanism protrusion of
appellant's claim 9, are described as being constructed and sized
so as to
project downward from the hammer to contact
the upper surface of a tablet in at least
two points on opposing sides of the rigid
ridgelet [15]. Thus a downward force may be
applied and divided by the fulcrum means of
the rigid ridgelet between portions of the
tablet. With sufficient force on the hammer,
the tablet will break across the fulcrum
(col. 7, lines 15-21).
See also, column 7, lines 48-57, of Gibilisco wherein the
operation of the slidable flanges (31) and the hammer (40) and
contacting surfaces (43) are further described.
From our perspective, the contacting surfaces (43) of
Gibilisco which are sized to apply forces to break the tablet
therein into smaller pieces, are the antithesis of the puncture
mechanism protrusion of appellant's claim 9 which is sized so
that the dosage unit is not damaged when the protrusion is nested
within the opening and the backing of the soft pack has been
punctured. Thus, since the apparatus of Gibilisco does not
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007