Appeal No. 1998-0187
Application No. 08/247,518
construction is devoid of any region of discontinuity
intermediate the body and handle. Our understanding of the
examiner’s position is that a homogeneous construction is an
inherent property of articles produced by injection molding.
See Answer, p. 14.
The appellant argues that claims 39 and 40 recite
features which would not be present if the cup were made by a
different process (see Main Brief, pp. 4 and 23), but that is
not the issue.
We view as reasonable the examiner’s determination that
articles made by injection molding would have been expected by
persons of ordinary skill to have a homogeneous construction.
The appellant has not presented any argument or evidence to
convince us otherwise. Thus, we will also sustain the
standing
35 U.S.C. § 103(a) rejection of claims 39 and 40.
Rejection (2)
We note that appellant has not argued the merits of the
rejection of claim 11 apart from the rejection of claim 8, the
independent claim upon which claim 11 depends. Therefore,
18
Page: Previous 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007