Ex parte SHELLEBY et al. - Page 2




          Appeal No. 96-2680                                                          
          Application No. 08/258,788                                                  



               tie means for securing said upper mesh layer and said lower            
          mesh layer together and holding said insulating layer in                    
          position; and                                                               
               at least one ferromagnetic plate, whereby each said                    
          ferromagnetic plate provides a lift point for lifting said                  
          insulating cover.                                                           
               The examiner relies upon the following references as                   
          evidence of obviousness:                                                    
          Schnabel                          982,883           Jan. 31, 1911           
          Evans et al. (Evans)              1,466,823         Sep.  4, 1923           
          Grant et al. (Grant)              4,424,957         Jan. 10, 1984           
               Appellants' claimed invention is directed to an insulating             
          cover for the opening in a torpedo car, as well as methods for              
          forming and installing the insulating cover.  Torpedo cars, or              
          ladle cars, are used for carrying molten metal.  The insulating             
          cover of the present invention comprises an insulating layer                
          positioned between upper and lower mesh layers and at least one             
          ferromagnetic plate.  The ferromagnetic plate enables the                   
          insulating cover to be lifted by an electromagnet.                          
               Appealed claims 1-19 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as           
          being unpatentable over Grant in view of either Schnabel or Evans.          
               We have thoroughly reviewed the respective positions                   
          advanced by appellants and the examiner.  In so doing, we find              
          ourselves in agreement with appellants that the prior art applied           
          by the examiner fails to establish a prima facie case of                    

                                         -2-                                          




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007