Appeal No. 95-2081
Application 07/825,778
straight up and down at a right angle to the plane of the
bottom of the powerboat, as seen in Figures 3, 9, 10 and 12 of
the application drawings. Thus, a wall, such as the wall (24)
seen in Figures 4-6 of Small, which merely has "a vertical
component" is not the same as appellant's "vertical wall" set
forth in claim 1 on appeal.
Pointing to column 3, lines 45-50 of Small, the
examiner further urges that Small teaches making the angle of
the wall (24) relative to the keel line (13) "past 30 degrees"
and thus encourages experimentation, with the result being
that "the result that appellant has claimed is only a result
of this experimentation, and not a novel approach to the
problem" (answer, page 9). As for the height of the wall in
Small not
being "approximately one inch" as claimed, the examiner has
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007