Appeal No. 2003-0161
Application No. 09/578,575
with a motivation to carry out the appellants’ claimed invention
and a reasonable expectation of success in doing so, the examiner
has not carried the burden of establishing a prima facie case of
obviousness of the appellants’ claimed invention. Accordingly,
we reverse the examiner’s rejection.
New ground of rejection
Claims 18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Hotta.
Claim 18: Hotta discloses a constant temperature box for
foodstuffs or beverages (col. 1, lines 4-8), comprising a
container (3) which can be filled with water, put into a freezer
to freeze the water, and then placed in a body (1) of the
constant temperature box (col. 1, lines 62-65; col. 2, lines 1-5,
50-52 and 62-65; col. 3, lines 52-54). The interior of the body
is closed tight by the container to preserve the cold within the
box for a long time (col. 3, lines 20-22). Thus, Hotta’s
container is capable of cooling and maintaining milk at an
effective temperature for consumption without using ice or
electricity as required by the appellants’ claim 18.
The appellants’ claim 18 requires “means for holding crates
of milk”. Such means include the corresponding structure
disclosed in the appellants’ specification and equivalents
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007