Appeal No. 2000-0305 Page 17
Application No. 08/887,453
of the article as recited in claim 12. We find this argument
unpersuasive for the same reasons as set forth above with
respect to claim 11.
For the reasons set forth above, the decision of the
examiner to reject claim 12 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being
anticipated by Alwitt is affirmed.
Claims 1, 8 and 9
The appellant argues (brief, pp. 12-13) that Alwitt's
case does not disclose inverting and reinverting part of the
case to access or insert/remove an article as recited in claim
1. We do not agree. As set forth above with respect to claim
11, Alwitt's cover 16 is inherently capable of inverting and
reinverting to access or insert/remove an article from the
case 10.
For the reasons set forth above, the decision of the
examiner to reject claims 1, 8 and 9 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b)
as being anticipated by Alwitt is affirmed.
Page: Previous 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007