Appeal No. 2002-0195
Application No. 09/174,977
dioxide in a sealed container which has a high moisture content and
has been the subject of a gas flush with carbon dioxide (Brief,
page 2).2 Appellants state that the claims should be grouped into
two groups, with claims 22-29 standing or falling with claim 30
while claims 32-39 stand or fall with claim 31 (Brief, page 3).
Since appellants present reasonably specific, substantive arguments
for the separate patentability of claims 30 and 31 (e.g., Brief,
page 14; Answer, page 2, ¶(7)), we consider each claim separately
to the extent they have been argued separately. See 37 CFR
§ 1.192(c)(7)(2000). A copy of illustrative independent claims 30
and 31 is attached as Appendix I to this decision.
The examiner relies upon Nakamura et al. (Nakamura), U.S.
Patent No. 4,384,972, issued May 24, 1983, as evidence of
obviousness (Answer, page 2). Accordingly, the claims on appeal
stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over
Nakamura (id.). We affirm the examiner’s rejection of claims 31-39
essentially for the reasons stated in the Answer, our decision in
Appeal No. 1995-3770, and those reasons set forth below. We
reverse the examiner’s rejection of claims 22-30 essentially for
the reasons stated in the Brief, Reply Brief, the decision in
2All reference to and citation from the Brief refers to the
Substitute Brief dated Mar. 19, 2001, Paper No. 18.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007