Appeal 2006-2032
Application 09/891,948
Appellant seeks review of the Examiner’s rejections under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) of claims 1-36 as unpatentable over Apps ‘279 in view of Hammett,
McGrath, and Sauey and claims 1-10, 12-34, and 36 as unpatentable over
Apps ‘793 or Apps ‘002 in view of Hammett, McGrath, and Sauey.
The Examiner provides reasoning in support of the rejections in the
Answer (mailed February 2, 2006). Appellant presents opposing arguments
in the Brief (filed September 9, 2004) and Reply Brief (filed March 6, 2006).
ISSUES
The first issue before us in this appeal is whether the combined
teachings of Apps ‘279, Hammett, McGrath, and Sauey would have
suggested modifying the low depth bottle case of Apps ‘279 to form the
interior columns 30 with a height less than the height of the columns 30
disposed along the sidewalls 12, 14, 16, 18.
The second issue before us is whether the combined teachings of
Apps ‘793, Hammett, McGrath, and Sauey would have suggested modifying
the low depth bottle case of Apps ‘793 to form the columns 52, 54, 56 with a
height less than the height of the pylons 24, 26, 28, 30, 32 along the side
walls of the case.
The third issue before us is whether the combined teachings of Apps
‘002, Hammett, McGrath, and Sauey would have suggested modifying the
cross-stacking bottle case of Apps ‘002 to form the interior columns 30 with
a height less than the height of the columns 30 disposed along the sidewalls
12, 14, 16, 18.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013