Appeal No. 2000-1623
Application 09/030,385
would have been obvious in view of Grossen’s teaching of an
insert made of resilient material.
Appellant argues that, even if combined, Johnstonbaugh
and Grossen would not teach or suggest the claimed invention.
After
fully considering the record in light of the arguments
presented in the brief, reply brief, and examiner’s answer, we
find ourselves in agreement with the appellant.
Claim 1 requires, inter alia:
said insert ... having ... a pair of opposed legs
... , said legs having flanges on the outwardly
extending ends thereof, said flanges facing away
from each other and spaced outwardly, away from the
surface of said panel on opposite sides of said slot
[,] when said insert is positioned in said slot [,]
a distance adapted to removably support, between a
pair of adjacent flanges which face each other, a
sheet of display material between said exposed
surface of said panel and said flanges.
In the Johnstonbaugh apparatus, the panel 10 may include a
surface covering 46 affixed to either or both surfaces (col.
3, lines 5 to 7). The legs 40, 41 of the insert have flanges
(“hooks”) 44, 45 at their outer ends, which engage the lips
27, 28 of the opening of the T-slot 11 to increase its
strength and provide a better aesthetic appearance (col. 2,
lines 48 to 52; col. 2, line 65, to col. 3, line 2). The
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007