Appeal 2007-0924
Application 10/401,079
such as by removing the label (Wolfe, col. 4, l. 66) or placing it back within
the cover member 22b (Wolfe, col. 5, ll. 5-7). Wolfe's cap member 24b is,
of course, a means for enclosing the cover member 22b. We therefore
conclude that, contrary to Appellant's argument, Wolfe teaches "a means for
storing objects and a means for enclosing the storing objects means wherein
one of the storing objects means and the enclosing means defines an internal
space in which the expandable structure can be manipulated" as required by
claim 16.
For the reasons explained above, Appellant fails to demonstrate the
Examiner erred in rejecting claim 16 as anticipated by Wolfe. The rejection
is sustained as to claim 16, as well as claims 17 and 18, which Appellant has
not argued separately from claim 16.
The obviousness rejections
Claims 1, 2, 5 and 8:
Claim 1, and claims 2, 5 and 8 depending therefrom, recite a housing
defining a first internal space to store at least one item, an expandable
structure, and an occluding structure removably coupled to the housing,
wherein one of the housing and the occluding structure defines a second
internal space separate from the first internal space. The Examiner concedes
that the device of Figures 10 and 11 of Wolfe, relied upon by the Examiner
in rejecting the claims, does not have structure defining first and second
internal spaces, the second internal space being separate from the first
internal space. To address this deficiency, the Examiner relies upon the
teaching of Yannuzzi of providing a separate compartment within an
emergency medical information container for emergency pills or other
10
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013