Appeal No. 2004-1240
Application No. 09/742,691
page 606 of Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary,
10th Edition (2000). Hence, an integrated structure is
a union of more than one piece. The examiner does not
explain how the serrated edge depicted in the picture
on page 4 of the answer is a piece that is united to
something else (e.g., to the box). To the contrary,
the reproduced image shows a unitary piece, not pieces
united together. Hence, we find that the examiner has
not properly interpreted appellant’s claim (the
examiner simply states that the cutting device [of the
AAPA] is integrated “in that it is part of the box”,
answer, page 7).
We also find that the AAPA does not disclose an
“integrated” cutting blade in view of our claim
interpretation as discussed above. The AAPA is a
unitary piece. Therefore, we determine that the AAPA
does not anticipate the claimed invention.2
We turn now to the obviousness rejection of claim
1. The examiner relies upon AAPA in view of Budny or
Clatterbuck. Both Budny and Clatterbuck disclose an
“integrated” cutting blade in that the cutting means
is united with another piece. See Figure 1 of
Clatterback (knife edge 18 is secured to container
12) and see Figure 1 of Budny (cutting means 44 is
2 As an aside, the word “blade” means “a cutting part of an
implement.” See page 120 of the Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate
Dictionary, 10th Edition (2000). As pointed out by the examiner,
the serrated edge depicted, for example, in the reproduced image
on page 4 of the answer, cuts foil. Hence, it is a cutting part
of an instrument, and therefore falls within the aforementioned
definition of a “blade”.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007