Appeal No. 97-2535
Application 08/129,108
plastic container is seated. However, according to appellants' application disclosure as filed (namely
the original specification, the original claims and the original drawings), the plastic container is seated on
the top plate of the pallet floor while the mesh cage is attached to the bottom plate of the pallet floor
though the engagement of the fastening
elements (e.g., discs 30) with the underside of the bottom plate. The specific language that the
container and the cage are respectively seated on and permanently attached to the same floor plate
cannot be ignored.
As a result, the disclosure in appellants' application as originally filed does not reasonably
convey to the artisan that appellants had possession at that time of the subject matter now claimed. The
disclosure as originally filed, therefore, does not satisfy the description requirement in the first paragraph
of § 112. See In re Kaslow, 707 F.2d 1366, 1375, 217 USPQ 1089, 1096 (Fed. Cir. 1983).
With regard to the new rejection under the second paragraph of § 112, the combination
defined by dependent claim 10 contains limitations of two mutually exclusive embodiments, namely the
embodiment of Figure 5 (and its variation in Figure 6) and the embodiment of Figure 3. In the
embodiment of Figure 5, the cage is permanently attached to the pallet floor plate. In the embodiment
of Figure 3, the cage is detachably connected to the floor plate by the removable nuts 28.
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007