Ex Parte Calhoun et al - Page 5


               Appeal No. 2003-1599                                                                                                   
               Application 09/494,028                                                                                                 

               casket 10, even in view of the disclosure that “the present invention is applicable to one-piece                       
               casket lids” that we find in Winburn (col. 3, lines 49-51), because the three panel arrangement                        
               must necessarily be present.  Indeed, while we find that Winburn discloses a single panel 50 in,                       
               e.g., Fig. 9 as described at col. 3, lines 32-39, we fail to find therein a suggestion to combine this                 
               single cap panel inset with any other cap panel insert in applying such panel to a one-piece casket                    
               lid.                                                                                                                   
                       Thus, on this record, we find that as a matter of fact, Winburn does not describe the                          
               claimed dish assembly encompassed by the appealed claims within the meaning of § 102(b), and                           
               accordingly, we reverse the first ground of rejection.  With respect to the ground of rejection                        
               under § 103(a), on this record, we further conclude as a matter of law that Winburn alone or                           
               combined with Cox does not provide any objective teaching, suggestion or motivation to arrive at                       
               the claimed invention encompassed by the appealed claims, and accordingly, we reverse the third                        
               ground of rejection.                                                                                                   
                       With respect to the second ground of rejection, the language of appealed claim 35, on                          
               which appealed claims 36 through 38 depend, illustrates the involved dispositive claim                                 
               interpretation issue:                                                                                                  
                       35.  A dish assembly adapted to be positioned in a lid of a casket, said dish assembly                         
               comprising:                                                                                                            
                       a cap panel;                                                                                                   
                       a first cap panel insert overlying said cap panel, said first cap panel having opposite end                    
               edge portions; and                                                                                                     
                       a second cap panel insert overlying said cap panel, said second cap panel insert having an                     
               end edge portion overlying one of said end edge portions of said first cap panel insert.                               
                       The examiner states that“[r]egarding claim 35, per the current claim language, a casket                        
               and its lid are not being positively claimed and represents the intended use of the dish assembly”                     
               (answer, page 6; see also page 3).  Appellants contend that “[a] dish assembly is a term of art                        
               well known in the funeral industry to describe an aesthetically pleasing unit structured,                              
               configured and arranged to fit within the underneath side of a casket cap” (brief, page 11).  We                       
               note, in this respect, the disclosure at specification page 2, lines 6-8.                                              



                                                                - 5 -                                                                 



Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007