Appeal No. 2005-1278 Page 15
Application No. 10/145,226
central portion as defined by this rejection because central portion 74 has two rows of
apertures extending from one side edge of portion 74 to the opposite side edge of
portion 74; and (2) the portion of the inner surface of the portion 74 between the first
and second rows is a centrally located side wall portion which is a substantially smooth,
non-apertured inner surface for contacting the object and reducing force thereagainst
when the container is in an assembled position.
In our view, the limitation that the opposed sidewalls have "a central portion with
a substantially smooth, non-apertured inner surface for contacting the object and
reducing force thereagainst'' as set forth in claim 12 is readable on Overholt '054 as set
forth by the examiner. That is, the portion of the inner surface of each of the central
portions 74, 76 between the two rows of apertures is a central portion of the side wall
with a substantially smooth, non-apertured inner surface for contacting the object and
reducing force thereagainst when the container is in an assembled position.
The limitation that the opposed sidewalls or endwalls have an inner surface with
"a bowed and substantially unbroken central portion" as set forth in claim 20 is not
readable on Overholt '054. In that regard, while the portion of the inner surface of each
of the central portions 74, 76 of Overholt '054 between the two rows of apertures is
unbroken, the portion of the inner surface of each of the central portions 74, 76 between
Page: Previous 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007