Appeal 2006-1989
Application 09/772,278
Patent 5,996,948
(2) Whether Appellants have established the Examiner erred in rejecting
claims 1, 2, and 5 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) because claimed
limitations are not taught by Buff?
FINDINGS OF FACT
The following findings of fact are believed to be supported by a
preponderance of the evidence.
A. The Invention
1. Appellant invented a wire chafing stand. The wire chafing
stand permits multiple wire chafing stands to be nested and readily separated
from one another without causing wedging. (Specification, col. 1, ll. 51-53).
2. Appellant states at column 3, lines 21-27, that:
FIG. 1-6 . . . illustrate a pair of nested wire chafing stands 10 of
identical construction with each stand 10 including an upper
rim 12 of any desired geometry, such as oval, square or
rectangular, and a lower rim 14 of a geometry substantially
identical to that of the upper rim 12.
3. Appellant states at column 3, lines 29-32, that:
The upper rim 12 is spaced apart from the lower rim 14 by wire
legs 16 so that the upper and lower rims are in a substantially
parallel relationship.
- 5 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013