Appeal No. 2006-1845
Application No. 10/350,875
THE REJECTIONS
Claims 1-6, 8 and 9 stand rejected as follows: under
35 U.S.C. § 102(a) as anticipated by ASCI, and under
35 U.S.C. § 103 as obvious over Letner in view of ASCI.1
OPINION
We reverse the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a) and
affirm the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
Rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)
We need to address only the sole independent claim, i.e.,
claim 1. That claim requires a single drain that runs
substantially the length of an interior space.
The examiner argues that ACSI discloses “a full length
single drain (pg. 5)” (answer, page 4). The ACSI web page
relied upon by the examiner states that the available features
include “[f]ull length troughs”. The ACSI web page relied upon
by the appellant shows drains that extend the width rather than
the length of the interior space (page 4).
1 The examiner’s rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a) is over “Advanced
Containment Systems, Inc. and the associated accessories web page” (answer,
page 4). The “associated accessories web page” is http://www.aramsco.com,
and the examiner has not established that the ACSI web pages and the Aramsco
web page describe the same product. The difference in the company names
indicates that different products are described. That error is not
prejudicial to the examiner because the appellant provides, in the
supplemental appendix, a picture of an ACSI floor trough drain that is
similar to the trough shown in the Aramsco web page. We consider the ACSI
web pages to be complete in themselves, the “[f]ull length drain troughs”
referred to therein being those in the ACSI picture provided by the
appellant.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007