Appeal No. 2005-2350
Application No. 10/056,352
indicates that the separate carrier part 112 in figure 7 may be
directly injected molded onto the bottom 110 of the test tube 100
as well.
Although we recognize that the teachings in part, in the
paragraph bridging columns 2 and 3 of Wijnschenk, indicate that
the laser may burn the machine readable code into the actual
material comprising structure of the carrier part itself, the
additional teachings at column 7, lines 5 through 20 which
indicate that a separate carrier part may utilize a separate
carrier surface. In any event since appellants have not argued
the combinability and teachings of Moh, that reference provides
additional teachings of the use of a separate coating that may be
otherwise deposited in some product-by-process manner onto an
exterior surface of glass-type articles consistent with the test
tubes claimed. Finally, we observe that the flat plate 107 at
the bottom of figure 7 is a separately identifiable part from the
carrier part 110 which the artisan would clearly interpret as a
separate coating that is otherwise deposited on the bottom
surface of the carrier part 112 in that figure. It is within
this flat plate 107 that the machine readable codes are burned in
by laser action. All these teachings are in addition to the
discussion noted earlier beginning at the bottom of column
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007