Appeal No. 2005-1957
Application No. 10/000,976
extension enables a user to “partially remove” the container
12 from the packaging “prior to the beginning of the removal” of
removable seal 14 (specification, sentence bridging pages 5-6,
italics added), we construe the contested limitation as including
any movement of the container from the packaging prior to the
beginning of the removal of the sealing member (see appellants’
argument in the Brief, page 6, first paragraph).
In view of our claim construction, we determine that the
examiner has not met the initial burden of establishing that
Uchida discloses, either expressly or inherently, every
limitation of the claims on appeal. The examiner fails to
establish that the cartridge disclosed by Uchida can be partially
removed without beginning the removal of the seal (see the Answer
in its entirety). Although the examiner presents the argument in
the final Office action that Uchida does not disclose at what
point in removal does the sealing member begin to separate from
the cartridge (page 4), the reference clearly suggests that the
step of drawing out the cartridge begins stripping of the sealing
member (see col. 3, ll. 48-51; see also Figure 4 and col. 3, ll.
30-31). Therefore we cannot sustain the examiner’s rejection of
the claims on appeal under section 102(b) over Uchida.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007