Appeal No. 96-3999 Page 5
Application No. 08/395,719
The examiner determined (answer, p. 6) that
Bourcart discloses a stackable container as shown in
Fig. 3 comprising a hollow cylinder 41, integral top wall
42, integral bottom wall with a circular well 51 and tubular
threaded mouth member 43 which receives threaded cap 44.
The well has a diameter which would receive the mouth of a
second like container and allow stacking of the containers
with a close fitting sliding interlocking relationship.
The appellant argues (reply brief, p. 2) that the following
limitations of claim 1 are not met by Bourcart. First, that the
well at the bottom of the container has "a selected diameter to
receive the tubular mouth member of a second like container to
enable the first container to be stacked on top of the second
container" is not met by Bourcart since the shallow recess at the
bottom of his vial of Figure 3 is configured to receive the cap
of an entirely different container. Second, that "the outer
diameter of the annular skirt portion of said cover and the inner
diameter of the well are selected to enable the first container
to be stacked over the second container in a close fitting
sliding interlocking relationship" is not met by Bourcart since
any attempt to place the vial of Figure 3 on top of a similar
vial would cause the upper vial to tip over as the diameter of
the cover in Bourcart is not selected to enable the first
container to be fitted over a second like container in a close
fitting sliding interlocking relationship.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007