Appeal No. 2002-2254 Page 8
Application No. 09/456,046
Thus, it follows that the decision of the examiner to reject claim 4 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(a) is also affirmed.
The obviousness rejection of claim 6
We will not sustain the rejection of claim 6 under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
Claim 6 reads as follows:
An apparatus for placement underneath a barbecue grill for catching and
collecting grease and splatter, comprised of:
a base mat, said base mat having a circular shape;
a single circular grease barrier, said circular grease barrier being
permanently fastened around a perimeter of said base mat to form a grease
accumulation area in a center of said apparatus; and
wherein said circular grease barrier has a semi-hemispherical cross
section to facilitate the wheels of a conventional barbecue rolling over it.
In the rejection of claim 6, the examiner determined (answer, pp. 3-4) that
Sandaj does not limit the shape of the mat to be rectangular and that the claimed
circular shaped mat would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a
person of ordinary skill in the art. The appellant argues (brief, p. 6) that the claimed
circular grease barrier having a semi-hemispherical cross section to facilitate the wheels
of a conventional barbecue rolling over it is not suggested by Sandaj.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007