Appeal No. 2005-1826
Application No. 10/210,046
quarter circle with an anchor tab extending outwardly therefrom
and secured to an adjacent panel member. Conceding that the
Kanter container has no such corner support member, the examiner
turns to Hamilton to account for this deficiency.
Hamilton discloses a stackable tray which includes corner
support members in the form of quarter circles having respective
anchor tabs. The examiner submits that it would have been
obvious “to provide a support member being shaped as a quarter
circle and having an anchor tab in Kanter as taught by Hamilton
to provide an alternative corner support structure for a
container” (answer, page 5). The problem here, however, is that
Hamilton’s corner support members are part of an intricate folded
blank construction which differs markedly from that disclosed by
Kanter. The examiner has failed to cogently explain, and it is
not apparent, how or why one of ordinary skill in the art would
have found it obvious to incorporate the particular quarter
circle and anchor tab configuration taught by Hamilton into the
container disclosed by Kanter so as to arrive at a corner support
of the sort set forth in parent claim 1 and further defined in
dependent claim 4. The only suggestion for such a combination
stems from hindsight knowledge impermissibly derived from the
appellant’s disclosure.
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007