Appeal No. 1999-1824
Application No. 08/513,835
The term "adjacent" is defined as "near or close; adjoining." Further, we are informed3
by the appellants' specification (pages 11 and 12) that
an intended breaking point constructed as an annular notch 10 is arranged in the
partial spherical surface 7a of the upper end wall 6a near the transition 11 to the
upper bulge 8a. At this location is the area of the greatest extension of the end
wall 6a under the influence of an internal pressure of the inner container 2.
The appellants' specification also teaches, on page 7, that
[e]xperiments have shown that the maximum extension of the end wall occurs in
the spherical surface of the end wall in the immediate vicinity to the bulge of the
cup-shaped bottom, and that the maximum extension of the end wall at this
location occurs in tangential direction relative to a concentric circle on the
spherical surface of the end wall.
It is apparent from this disclosure in the appellants' specification that an object of the appellants'
invention is to locate the notch, which is the intended breaking point, in the end wall in the
immediate vicinity of the central bulge because this is the location of maximum extension of the
end wall under the influence of an internal pressure in the container. In light of this disclosed
objective, one of ordinary skill in the field of the appellants' invention would understand the
above-cited language from claim 9 as requiring that the notch be located near, in the sense of
being in the immediate vicinity of, the central bulge. Accordingly, we interpret the term
"adjacent" as used in claim 9 as meaning "in the immediate vicinity of."
Turning now to the prior art references cited by the examiner in support of the
obviousness rejection of claims 9-11 and 13, we note that Zinkann (Figures 6-9) provides a
3 Webster's New World Dictionary, Third College Edition (Simon & Schuster, Inc. 1988).
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007