Appeal No. 2006-1428 Παγε 7
Application No. 10/669,157
enclosed container would not permit sunlight to reach the plants
and would not permit water to drain from the soil.
From our review of the references, we note at the outset
that the agricultural product container of Khoury could be used
as a planter because it is a container for agricultural products
that contains numerous holes 48. In addition, we find Rolfe
to be analogous art because it is directed to the problem of
connecting together two containers. From the disclosure of Rolfe
of using flange 31 and channel 30 for connecting another
container to the first container, we find that an artisan would
have been motivated to connect containers together in view of the
combined teachings of Khoury and Rolfe.
We additionally agree with the examiner that to add a third
container would have been an obvious duplication of elements to
an artisan. However, it is at this point that we part company
with the examiner. Claim 1 requires that the flanges configured
for permitting attachment to second and third back wall, bottom
wall are disposed on the sidewalls. From our review of Rolfe, we
find that the channel 30 and flange 31 are mounted on a sidewall,
but that the flange and channel do not connect to the bottom
wall, back wall and front wall, but rather to the sidewall of
another container. The support members 11-13 on the bottom of
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007