Appeal No. 99-0952
Application 08/795,494
from our review of the Nusselder document that the
intermediate bottom 4 of the box-shaped center part 1 exhibits
a circular recess 20 on both upper and lower sides thereof as
preparation for the acceptance of elevated seats 9 and peg
arrangements 10. Focusing upon Fig. 2, in particular, it is
apparent to us that the noted structure forming the circular
recesses is offset relative to the intermediate bottom 4.
However, as we see it, this construction of Nusselder is
not that set forth in claim 9. Considering the reference as a
whole, it is clear to us that one skilled in the art would
have fairly understood the intermediate bottom 4 (support
plate) to be symmetrically positioned relative to box-shaped
floor parts 2, notwithstanding that the structure forming
central recesses 20 is offset. Thus, Nusselder simply does
not respond to the requirement in claim 9 of a support plate
extending asymmetrically between lid parts forming two spaces
of different sizes, with each of the spaces extending over
substantially an entire side of the support plate. Since the
evidence before us is lacking as indicated, the rejection of
claim 9 under 35 U.S.C. 102(b) must be reversed. As a
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007