Appeal No. 2001-0217
Application No. 09/186,741
In light of the appellant’s position, we shall summarily
sustain the standing 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph,
rejection of claims 27 through 29.
II. The 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) rejections
Ellinwood, the examiner’s primary reference, discloses a
“floating wall” system which employs a T-shaped element to
attach wall and ceiling panels to underlying studs in a
“floating” manner. As shown in the drawing figures, the T-
shaped element, which is affixed to the stud by a nail 28,
comprises a base 24 which engages the stud 10 and side flanges
25 which extend partially into grooves 20 in the confronting
edges of adjacent panels 11.
Contrary to the findings made by the examiner (see pages
4 and 5 in the answer), Ellinwood’s T-shaped element does not
respond to the limitations in independent claims 18 and 27
requiring a substantially flat horizontal top element having
“a generally biscuit-shaped top view configuration,” the
limitation in claim 18 requiring “at least two” substantially
vertical
support members attached to an underside of the top element,
or the limitation in claim 27 requiring the vertical support
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007