Appeal No. 2002-1099 7
Application No. 09/208,119
Hagiwara does not cure the fundamental deficiencies of Hehn, Koizumi and
Nakasuji with respect to the limitations of claim 18 that the spine does not extend beyond
the sidewall when the lid is in the closed position, or that container comprises at least one
set of locking holes that move substantially perpendicular to the common axis defined by
the holes when the lid is initially moved from the closed position toward the open position.
On this basis alone, the rejection of claims 20-23, which depend either directly or indirectly
from base claim 18, cannot be sustained.
Moreover, the examiner’s reliance on Hagiwara for a teaching of the flange
limitations of claims 20 and 25 noted above also is not well founded. Even if Hehn were to
be provided with a flange of the type disclosed by Hagiwara, the resulting modified storage
case would not have a flange that extends out from the edge of the sidewall to the edge of
the base, as called for in claim 20, or a flange that extends outwardly such that no portion
of the spine extends beyond the flange, as called for in claim 25. The examiner’s position
that it would have been further obvious to extend the flange of the modified Hehn
container to the edge of the base “since a change in size is generally recognized as being
within the level of ordinary skill in the art” (answer, page 4) is not well founded. First, the
proposed extension of the flange of the modified Hehn container involves not merely a
change in size, but rather a change in relative size of the flange compared to the base and
spine of the container. Hence, the examiner reliance on In re Rose, 220 F.2d 459, 105
USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955) in support of the proposed extension of the flange is improper.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007