Appeal No. 97-1974
Application 08/286,696
combination.
Rejection (1) will therefore be sustained.
Rejection (2)
The rejection of claim 1 as anticipated by Shepherd will
be sustained.
Appellants' only argument with regard to claim 1 is that
Shepherd's base 12 and upper flowerpot holder 26, which is
disclosed as being attached to the base by bolt 42 and nut 44,
are not "integrally formed", as recited. The construction of
the expression "integrally formed" was considered in In re
Morris, 127 F.3d 1048, 44 USPQ2d 1023 (Fed. Cir. 1997). In
that case, the examiner held that an elastomeric pad 100
disclosed in the reference (Brown) as being engaged between
the base plate and lower housing was "integrally formed" as a
portion of the support member. The court sustained this
interpretation, as follows (127 F.3d at 1055-1056, 44 USPQ at
1029):
We conclude that the PTO's interpretation is
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007