Appeal No. 1998-1357
Application No. 08/348,744
practicing in the art. See In re Sovish, 769 F.2d 738, 743,
226 USPQ 771, 744 (Fed. Cir. 1985). This being the case, we
are of the opinion that the artisan would have been well aware
that mica is fireproof and that the space, as discussed with
respect to claim 110, between the inner tank and the outer
shell may be sized such that the insulating medium (mica) is
of a sufficient thickness to enable the storage tank to at
least meet a two hour fire wall rating. Therefore, we will
affirm the examiner's rejection of claims 118 and 132 under 35
U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as being unpatentable over Kettlewell.
Next, we examine the rejection of claims 109, 115, 128,
130 and 141 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable
over Kettlewell in view of Lindquist. As we have determined
above, Kettlewell discloses a three layer storage tank which
is capable of storing gasoline or other flammable liquids. We
additionally note that outer shell 11 of Kettlewell is, at its
upper portion, preferably open, thereby forming an open-topped
container
(page 1, col. 2, lines 51-53), a limitation which is recited
29
Page: Previous 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007