Appeal No. 97-4166
Application No. 08/478,647
the specification or file history that they were used
differently by the inventor” (emphasis added), In re Paulsen,
30 F.3d 1475, 1480, 31 USPQ2d 1671, 1674 (Fed. Cir. 1994).
Here, however, throughout the specification the appellant has
used the terminology "wedge" or "wedging means" to mean that
the beverage container contacts the holder at first and second
points P1, P2 and thereby is restrained from further or
additional tipping (see, e.g., page 4, lines 1 and 2; page 8,
lines 10 and 11). Indeed, if the beverage container or can
was "tightly held" as the appellant now argues, the beverage
can, once tilted, would be tightly held in this tilted
position and would not return to a vertical position and be
"loosely disposed" in the cavity and removable therefrom in a
vertical direction "without substantial frictional resistance"
in the intended manner (see the arguments on page 8 of the
request). For the reasons stated on pages 11 and 12 of our
decision, we remain of the opinion that Hummer teaches a wedge
or wedging means in the same sense as used in the
specification.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007