Appeal No. 2005-0485
Application No. 09/303,632
that the claim read on something disclosed in the reference,
i.e., that all of the limitations in the claim be found in or
fully met by the reference. Kalman v. Kimberly Clark Corp., 713
F.2d 760, 772, 218 USPQ 781, 789 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert. denied,
465 U.S. 1026 (1984).
The appellants’ position that the rejection of claims 32, 35
through 37, 41 and 42 is unsound because independent claims 32
and 41 contain a number of limitations not met by Gaible is
unpersuasive. Each of Gaible’s flexible, clear, extruded plastic
sidewalls 32a and 32b comprises a flat and entirely transparent
planar sheet of pliable plastic film of uniform thickness
throughout as recited in claim 32, and collectively these
sidewalls comprise two identical flat entirely transparent planar
sheets of pliable plastic film as recited in claim 41.
Notwithstanding the appellants’ argument to the contrary, each
sidewall embodies a “film” under the ordinary and accustomed
meaning of this term. For example, Webster’s New World
Dictionary of the American Language, Second College Edition (The
World Publishing Company 1972) defines “film” as “a fine, thin
skin, surface, layer, or coating.” This definition clearly
encompasses Gaible’s sidewalls 32a and 32b. Also, since claims
32 and 41 are open “comprising” claims, they do not exclude the
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007