Appeal No. 96-4137
Application 08/260,674
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Turner and Quinton and further in
view of Cone. Each of claims 6 and 21 recites a tray having
one flat surface and another surface generally parallel
therewith, the surface having a T shaped recess formed
therein. The examiner has cited Cone for teaching a T shaped
recess which in the examiner’s opinion comprises shank 44 and
cross portion with elements 52 and 54 as shown in figure 5.
We agree with the appellant that Cone does not disclose a T
shaped recess as recited in claims 6 and 21. In contrast Cone
discloses rectangular slots 72 and 74 and handle 44 (See
Figures 4 and 5). As such, we will not sustain the rejection
of claims 6 and 21 as unpatentable over Turner and Quinton and
further in view of Cone.
We turn next to the examiner’s rejection of claims
7, 8, 10, 15, 16 and 18 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Turner and Quinton as applied to claim 1
above, and further in view of Greenbaum.
Initially, we note that our decision as it relates
to the rejections of claims 7 and 16 is based upon our
interpretation of the claim language in view of the disclosure
in appellant’s specification. In this regard, we interpret
14
Page: Previous 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007