Appeal No. 1999-0391
Application 08/225,229
directly therein since it has a recessed area. This meets the language of claim 1, especially to the extent
set forth in the broad claim language. We note that claim 1 does not call for a drinking glass, nor does
claim 1 specify dimensions or a volume for the "vessel" or upper compartment.
Appellant argues (Brief, pages 5 to 6) that Ditto fails to teach a "lower compartment" of the
housing as defined in claim 1 on appeal. We disagree. As noted by the examiner, Figure 6 of Ditto
does indeed show a lower compartment defined in that it has "a volume determined approximately by a
height between the bottom circular edge and the circular dividing platform and a diameter of the
cylindrical portion" (see claim 1 on appeal). We are in agreement with the
examiner’s explanation at page 6 of the Answer that the volume immediately below the arcuate portion
75 constitutes a "lower compartment" as defined in claim 1, especially to the extent this feature is
broadly recited in the claim. We agree with the examiner that the lower compartment is defined by the
convex upper edge defined by base 75 of the compartment, over to the upper circular edge 67 of
housing 74, down to the bottom circular edge at 76, and across to the other bottom circular edge on
the right hand side of the figure. We also agree with the examiner
(Answer, pages 6 to 7) that the lower compartment of Ditto is increasable by a volume defined by the
base diameter and a second height between the bottom circular edge 76 and the circular base bottom
72. Accordingly, we find that Ditto anticipates claim 1 on appeal.
With respect to dependent claim 6 on appeal, appellant argues (Brief, page 6) that Ditto’s
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007