Appeal No. 2006-0128
Application No. 10/003,353
would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art at the time of appellant’s
invention. See, In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 425, 208 USPQ 871, 881 (CCPA 1981). In
this case, for the reasons noted above, we have no doubt that the combined teachings
of the applied patents would have provided ample suggestion for their combination as
posited by the examiner.
Dependent claim 2 adds to claim 1 on appeal that the force-transmitting relationship
between the core and the door panels is established by “adhesion and mechanical
coupling of the core to the panels.” Given the manner of constructing the steel clad
door of Zen (col. 2, lines 18-23 and col. 2, line 66 - col. 3, line 4), we find that, just like in
appellants’ door panel, the polyurethane material foamed into the interior of the door of
Zen will have the propensity to bond to the steel cladding panels (3) and to the elements
(5, 6, and 7) of the door frame (2) by adhesion and thereby establish a force-
transmitting relationship between the core and the cladding panels. As for a mechanical
coupling of the core to the cladding panels, we consider such to be provided by the fact
that the expanded foamed core material is bonded to both the cladding panels and the
jamb members (5) which are grooved (at 21) to receive the in-turned edges (22) of the
steel cladding panels, and to which the cladding panels may be further bonded (col. 3,
lines 38-42), thereby establishing an indirect mechanical coupling of the core to the
cladding panels. Like the examiner, we also view the bracing (12) in the jambs (5) of
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007