Appeal 2007-1325
Application 10/065,722
1 lugs 42 formed in lid 10 which, if located at the bottom of the drink opening
2 20, would similarly provide a stop surface for the drink plug, as it does
3 between successively stacked lids.
4 The recitation in claim 64 of the top wall reduced at opposite ends of
5 the drink opening is met by the portions of the wall adjacent the drink
6 opening 20 in Freek causing a reduced surface area of material.
7
8 G. Conclusions of law
9 Appellant has not sustained its burden on appeal of showing that the
10 Examiner erred in rejecting the claims on appeal as being unpatentable under
11 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over the prior art.
12 Claims 3, 9-11, 27-29, 36-39, 44-50, 55-59, 63, 65-70, 75-77, 80-83,
13 and 88-95 (claims on appeal) are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a).
14 Claim 4-7, 31-33, 64, 78, and 79 (which are not on appeal) are also
15 unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over the prior art.
16 Claim 84 and claims 85-87 which depend from claim 84, as well as
17 claims 40-43 and 71-74, are unpatentable under the second paragraph of
18 35 U.S.C. § 112.
19 On the record before us, Dart is not entitled to a patent containing any
20 of the pending claims in the application on appeal.
21
22 H. Decision
23 Upon consideration of the record, and for the reasons given, it is
24 ORDERED that the decision of the Examiner rejecting
25 claims 3, 9-11, 27-29, 36-39, 44-50, 63, 65-70, 75-77, 80-83, and 88-95 over
26 the prior art is affirmed.
35
Page: Previous 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013