Appeal 2006-2547
Application 10/095,409
Patent 6,237,775
1 Therefore, we reverse the decision of the Examiner to reject claims
2 24-28 under § 112, first paragraph, for lack of original descriptive support.
3 Rejection of claims 1-2, 4-5, 18-19, 21-22, 24-25 and 27-28 under § 103(a)
4 Claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 18, 19, 21, 22, 24, 25, 27 and 28 stand rejected
5 under § 103(a) over Brandenburg in view of Branz and Rostkowski. The
6 Examiner found, and Appellants do not dispute, that Bradenburg discloses a
7 vented food container "except for the louvers" (Answer, 4).
8 According to Rostkowski, containers providing moisture proof storage
9 are known and containers providing an abundance of ventilation are known,
10 especially for the storage of fruits and vegetables, but there are no known
11 largely moisture proof containers that provide a means of shielded
12 ventilation (col. 1, ll. 32-44). Rostkowski discloses shielding vents 7 with
13 integrated louvers 27 to provide ventilation for contents in a storage
14 container while protecting the contents from precipitation and sources of
15 ignition (col. 1, ll. 47-55 and col. 2, ll. 52-56).
16 Branz discloses a food preparation table having a forced air supply to
17 cool foodstuffs in condiment pans (col. 1, ll. 59-64). The pans are disposed
18 in a plenum having at least one air channel and at least one upper louver
19 (col. 2, ll. 40-65). As shown in Figs. 2 and 6, upper louvers 90 extend
20 toward and into plenum wall 70 so that air entering openings/vents 92 is
21 guided to travel in a downwardly direction toward pans 80 at about a 45
22 degree angle (col. 9, ll. 45-60). The downward bias of louver 90 also
23 prevents foodstuff from falling inside the complex wall structure of the
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013