Appeal No. 2000-0513
Application 08/803,047
denied, 465 U.S. 1026 (1984).
In applying Fry against claim 1, the examiner reads the
claim limitations relating to the “collection bin” and the
“pair of display sections” on Fry’s coin hopper 62 and doors
2, respectively (see page 3 in the answer). Recognizing that
Fry’s express disclosure does not support this reading, the
examiner relies on principles of inherency for justification
(see page 5 in the answer). Given its disposition within the
overall vending machine, however, the Fry coin hopper 62
cannot reasonably be said to inherently constitute a
“collection bin for receiving filled order envelopes” as
required by claim 1. Similarly, Fry’s doors 2 cannot
reasonably be said to inherently constitute “a pair of display
sections for displaying of merchandise” as recited in claim 1.
Moreover, Fry’s doors 2 are not positioned on each side of an
order workstation so as to define a storage area between the
pair of display sections and a workstation as further required
by the claim.
Independent claim 16 recites a combined photofinishing
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007