Appeal No. 2003-1754
Application No. 09/821,137 Page 5
Appellants refer to two issues but maintain that all of the
appealed claims are separately patentable (brief, pages 5 and 6).
Consequently, we will consider the appealed claims separately to
the extent that they have been separately argued as required by
our regulations and practice. See 37 CFR § 1.192(c)(7) and (8)
(2002). Also, see Ex parte Schier, 21 USPQ2d 1016, 1018 (Bd.
Pat. App. & Int. 1991). We start with the claims grouped under
appellants’ Issue Two.
Claims 46, 47, 53 and 54
Kaiser2 discloses, inter alia, a crustless sandwich and a
method of making the sandwich using a device comprising a
Tartmaster or Krimpkut sealer to cut and seal the bread. See
Kaiser, especially at pages 1, 2, 7 and the unnumbered page of
illustrated devices preceding the Table of Contents page, for
example, the Tartmaster devices labeled H2001 and H2003. As
found by the examiner (answer, page 4), Kaiser teaches or
suggests via the captioned illustrations at page 7 that a filling
is placed on a first slice of bread. The filling is shown and
2 Our consideration of Kaiser is limited to the excerpts
therefrom supplied by appellants. In the event of further
prosecution of this subject matter before the examiner,
appellants and the examiner may wish to consider whether the
entire work of Kaiser should be made of record for consideration
by the examiner.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007