Appeal No. 2001-0045 Page 9
Application No. 09/103,347
Claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 10, 11, 13 and 18 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b)
as being anticipated by Anderson.
Using the language of claim 1 as a guide and with particular reference to Figure
2, Anderson discloses a rack for mounting equipment, composed of a seismically sound
skeleton structure (column 1, lines 44-59; column 2, lines 59-65) having spaced vertical
uprights (12) supplemented by distinct spaced equipment mounting structures
(comprised of vertical unistruts 19, horizontal unistruts 18 and mounting channels 20)
attached to the skeleton structure and extending along the vertical uprights (12) and
constituting side wall structures of a mounting rack interior space in lateral extension of
the vertical uprights (vertical unistruts 19 are attached to and extend laterally from
vertical uprights 12) and including means for mounting the equipment (mounting
channels 20 have holes by which equipment can be attached). Thus, all of the subject
matter recited in claim 1 reads on the Anderson structure, and therefore Anderson is
anticipatory thereof.
Claim 2 adds to claim 1 the requirement that the spaced equipment mounting
structures are attached to the spaced vertical uprights, which is the case in Anderson,
as is evident from Figure 2, where the spaced equipment mounting structures are
attached to vertical uprights 12 through vertical unistrut 19.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007