Appeal 2007-2893
Application 10/818,885
depends from and further limits claim 8, requiring that the shell, second
heat-conductive plate and lid are all composed of stainless steel. As
discussed above, Proctor’s container “may be used with a liquid or solid held
in any type or size container and is useable in the food serving field in
general. The present invention can be used with cafeteria serving pans and
coffee storage pots which store coffee made in large urns” (Proctor, col. 4, ll.
62-66). In this regard, we find that a person of ordinary skill in the art
would recognize that cooking containers, such as coffee pots and those
containers usable in the food serving field, e.g., cafeteria serving pans, have
lids. Further, as discussed above, Proctor teaches the use of stainless steel
for the inner and outer walls of the cooking container. We find that a person
of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that lids can be made of stainless
steel. Accordingly, we find that claims 7-9 would have been prima facie
obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was
made in view of the combination of Proctor and Park.
Claim 10 depends from and further limits the shell of claim 1 to
comprise a sauce pot. As discussed above, Proctor’s container “may be used
with a liquid or solid held in any type or size container and is useable in the
food serving field in general. The present invention can be used with
cafeteria serving pans and coffee storage pots which store coffee made in
large urns” (Proctor, col. 4, ll. 62-66). We find that a person of ordinary
skill in the art would recognize that containers usable in the food serving
field include a sauce pot. Accordingly, we find that claim 10 would have
been prima facie obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time
the invention was made in view of the combination of Proctor and Park.
12
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013