Appeal No. 2000-0574
Application No. 08/876,321
protect the container (and its contents if in the assembled
state) from dust and dirt. Thus, we conclude that the
teachings of Porch and Kendig are sufficient to establish a
prima facie case of obviousness of the subject matter of
claims 16 and 17 and, accordingly, we shall sustain the
examiner's rejection of claims 16 and 17.
Rejection (6)
Independent claim 1 requires, inter alia, a base member,
a plurality of side walls, a plurality of end walls and a lid
comprising a planar top member, lid end members and side lid
members to form an interior recess "which can contain said
base member and said end walls when in a stacked unassembled
condition." The examiner has rejected claim 1, as well as
claims 8 and 9 which depend from claim 1, as being
unpatentable over Boughner in view of Covington.
Boughner, as pointed out by appellant on page 6 of the
brief, discloses a casket having a base which is wider than
the cover or lid. Thus, it is not apparent to us how the
interior recess defined by the lid "can contain said base
member..." as required by claim 1. The examiner's reliance on
13
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007