Appeal No. 1998-2606
Application 08/446,415
In re Avery, the noted language of the claims reciting a cover
having window opening is only corresponding to the showing of
the cover 19 with the window opening 20 in the showings in the
Figures 6 and 7 embodiments. The language is not otherwise
used to describe the cover 6 and the screen 7 attached thereto
describing the embodiment shown in Figure 1. Therefore, the
subject matter of the cover having a window opening does not
appear, when viewed in light of the specification of the
original patent, to read upon the showing of the cover 6 and
the screen 7 of the Figure 1 embodiment in such a manner as to
have rendered obvious within the doctrine the claimed light
sheet of claim 5 on appeal.
As to the other claims, claims 6 through 15 and 18
through 20, we agree generally with appellants' views that the
subject matter in these claims relates to subject matter first
included in this CIP application which was not present in the
parent application U.S. Patent 5,442,338. As to the rejection
of claims 1 through 21 under the judicially created doctrine
of obviousness-double patenting, we sustain this rejection
only as to claims 1 through 4, 16, 17 and 21 and reverse the
rejection as to claims 5 through 15 and 18 through 20.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007