Appeal No. 98-0111
Application No. 08/290,213
to meet the functional limitations of the claim. See In re
Mott, 557 F.2d 266, 269, 194 USPQ 305, 307 (CCPA 1977).
Claim 6 is directed to the combination of an automobile
having a cargo area and a protective liner disposed in the
cargo area. Taylor discloses a liner for a container that is
used in, among other things, “trucks and other vehicles”
(column 1, lines 22 and 23). The appellant has set forth two
grounds upon which he believes Taylor does not anticipate the
subject matter recited in claim 6. We are not persuaded by
either of them.
The first argument is that “[w]ith reference to Figure 3
of Taylor, there is no indication that this embodiment . . .
provides overlapping liner members,” as required by claim 6
(Brief, pages 9 and 10). This clearly is not the case. As
pointed out by the Examiner on page 7 of the Answer, Taylor
explicitly teaches, with reference to Figure 3, that “the
floor and wall sections are merely overlapped as necessary to
fit the container to be lined” (column 3, lines 52 and 53).
The second point raised by the appellant is that “Taylor
teaches the use of flexible and not rigid material” (Brief,
page 10). However, claim 6 does not require that the material
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007