Appeal No. 97-2540 Page 5
Application No. 08/339,558
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given
careful consideration to the appellants' specification and
claims, to the applied prior art references, and to the
respective positions articulated by the appellants and the
examiner. Upon evaluation of all the evidence before us, it is
our conclusion that the evidence adduced by the examiner is
insufficient to establish a case of obviousness with respect to
claims 23 through 29. Accordingly, we will not sustain the
examiner's rejection of claims 23 through 29 under
35 U.S.C. § 103. Our reasoning for this determination follows.
Claims 23 and 27, the only independent claims on appeal,
both recite a method comprising, inter alia, (1) molding a
recycling container having a pair of integral side-by-side
stackable compartments each having side and bottom walls,
(2) providing/forming the container with a hollow downwardly
opening upright partition between the compartments, (3) forming
the partition from a pair of adjacent side walls, (4) forming a
handle in an upper portion of the partition, and (5) providing a
hand opening in the partition beneath the handle.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007