Appeal No. 2001-1380
Application No. 09/138,998
OPINION
It is the examiner’s basic position that Akutagawa discloses
the instant claimed subject matter but for a mechanism for
opening/closing the lid on the disclosed housing. The examiner
turns to Sakuri, at column 4, line 16, for a teaching that an
opening in a main body of a structure may be uncovered either
“manually or by a drive mechanism,” and, at column 4, lines 53-
56, for a suggestion that the artisan would like to open and
close a lid reliably with only a limited space available for
storing the lid. The examiner then concludes that it would have
been obvious to add a mechanism for opening/closing the lid of
Akugatawa, wherein the mechanism comprises a drive unit for
moving the lid relative to the main body, and wherein the drive
unit comprises a first part secured to the main body and a second
part secured to the lid and arranged to cooperate with the first
part, as taught by Sakuri.
For their part, appellants do not dispute the obviousness of
motorizing opening motions of a lid, though they contend that the
creation of necessary linkages are “often patentably inventive”
[principal brief-page 6]. While a particular linkage may,
indeed, be patentably inventive, instant claims 3 and 4 do not
-3–
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007