Appeal No. 2000-0574
Application No. 08/876,321
conclude that the subject matter of claim 1 is not
anticipated by Porch. Therefore, we cannot sustain the2
examiner's rejection of independent claim 1, or claims 2, 3
and 8 which depend from claim 1, as being anticipated by
Porch.
Claim 5 is directed to a collapsible stackable casket "in
an unassembled stacked closed container" and requires a lid
assembly defining an internal lid chamber, a plurality of end
members stacked on a base member and a plurality of side
members "mounted on said lid assembly to form a stacked closed
container." While Porch teaches disassembling the shipping
container by removing the frame members from the panels and
stacking the flat panels for shipping, Porch provides no
teaching to mount the side members (sides 24, 26) on the lid
assembly (top panel 20 with frame members 32, 34, 36, 38
mounted thereto as shown in Figure 1). Accordingly, we shall
also not sustain the examiner's rejection of claim 5, or
Anticipation is established only when a single prior art reference2
discloses, expressly or under the principles of inherency, each and every
element of a claimed invention. RCA Corp. v. Applied Digital Data Sys., Inc.,
730 F.2d 1440, 1444, 221 USPQ 385, 388 (Fed. Cir. 1984).
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007