Appeal No. 2002-1807 Page 5
Application No. 09/247,419
It is clear to us from the appellant’s disclosure that the “basket” of the invention
comprises four side panels and a bottom panel, for a single numeral (20) has been
used to designate the basket in the drawings (see, in particular, Figures 1 and 4), and
the individual panels have not been separately described in the text or noted in the
drawings. It is our view that this is in keeping with what one of ordinary skill in the art
would interpret to be the basket of a shopping cart, which is the subject matter to which
the claims are directed. Therefore, it is our view that the term “basket,” as used in the
claims, should be interpreted as meaning a receptacle having four side panels and a
bottom panel.
That is not the case in Nicholl, wherein the “basket” is defined as comprising two
components, one of which is fixed with respect to the frame and the other movable with
respect thereto, with neither containing four side panels and a bottom panel. This is
abundantly clear from the description provided in columns 2 and 3, where it is stated
that “[t]he upper portion of the basket” is attached to frame members 4 (column 2, lines
63-67; emphasis added), and that “[t]he movable component of the basket . . . is slightly
smaller than and conforms in shape to the fixed portion of the basket” (column 3, line
40 et seq.; emphasis added). Furthermore, it is our view that neither of the separate
portions in and of itself is capable of functioning as a shopping cart “basket,” that is, a
receptacle capable of receiving and holding articles in the manner that is necessary for
such a device, for the fixed upper portion has no bottom panel and the movable lower
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007