Interference No. 103,036
claims 34 and 38 were canceled, this item will be considered as
to claims 33, 35 to 37, 39, 40 and 43. Independent claim 33
recites "[a] label comprising an integral battery voltmeter."
Independent claim 37 recites "[a] battery having a label with an
integral voltmeter." The motion relies upon the testimony of
Dr. Feder at CR 68 to 70, who testified that Burroughs et al.'s
Figure 2 shows the interrelationship between the battery 18 and
the indicator device 10, that the specification states that the
figure depicts a battery having a battery strength indicator and
that the figure shows no thickness for the indicator device.
Dr. Feder testified that since thickness is intimately related to
the heat transport between the device and the battery, the lack
of thickness emphasizes the fact that Burroughs et al.'s
specification does not teach the need for thermal insulation and
that nothing in Figure 2 or in the description thereof
corresponds to a label. We disagree.
Figures 1 and 2 are as follows:
-52-
Page: Previous 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007