Appeal No. 1998-1357
Application No. 08/348,744
Therefore, we will affirm the examiner's rejection of claim
108 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being unpatentable over
Kettlewell.
We now look at the examiner's rejection of claim 110
under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over
Kettlewell. We have already seen that Kettlewell does show a
three layer tank which can be, at least for some period of
time, a storage tank for whatever liquid is contained therein.
Kettlewell discloses an inner tank 10, an outer shell 11
spaced from the inner tank and insulation 13 filling the space
between the inner tank and outer shell. Kettlewell uses
spacing lugs 16 to space the inner tank from the outer shell.
Thus, it is our view that Kettlewell shows all of appellants'
subject matter recited in claim 110 on appeal except for the
intended use of the tank (i.e., for storing gasoline), and the
"substantially six inch" space between the inner tank and the
outer shell. While certainly not disclosed for any such use,
the storage tank of Kettlewell is certainly capable of storing
gasoline. And, while we believe that the space between the
inner tank and outer shell of Kettlewell falls within the
26
Page: Previous 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007