Appeal Number: 2006-0974
Application Number: 10/244,336
walls into the non-compressible material, exerting a second
compressive force against the non-compressible material,
resulting in a resistance to the first deflection and the force
tending to compress the beam.” The examiner does not explain
how Fox’s planar encasement member walls, which lack the
appellant’s concave shape, are capable of undergoing an
amplified second deflection.
The examiner, therefore, has not established a prima facie
case of anticipation of the appellant’s claimed invention by
Fox.
DECISION
The rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) of claims 56-63 over
Rivin is affirmed. The rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) of
claims 56, 57, 59 and 61-63 over Konsevich and claims 56-59 over
Fox are reversed. Under the provisions of 37 CFR § 41.50(b) a
new ground of rejection of claims 56-63 has been entered.
Regarding the affirmed rejection(s), 37 CFR § 41.52(a)(1)
provides "[a]ppellant may file a single request for rehearing
within two months from the date of the original decision of the
Board."
In addition to affirming the examiner's rejection(s) of one
or more claims, this decision contains a new ground of rejection
pursuant to 37 CFR § 41.50(b) (effective September 13, 2004, 69
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007