Appeal No. 95-1405
Application 08/095,276
Although the material comprising these insulating spacers
in Carlson is not disclosed in this reference, claim 1 does
not set forth any specific material either. Obviously, within
35 U.S.C. § 103, the rubber-like silicon material forming the
outside of the bus bar stack in representative Figure 4, for
example, of Davis clearly would have been a more specific
representation of the type of material comprising the spacers
in Carlson disclosed there only in a generic sense. Davis
discloses that this material is well known trademarked
SILASTIC material. The file record contains a copy of the
Condensed Chemical Dictionary from its 1971 edition indicating
the properties of this material at the top of 783 thereof.
The examiner’s comments with respect to this material in the
Final Rejection as well as at pages 3 and 4 of the Answer are
well supported by this dictionary.
As to appellants’ arguments with respect to independent
claim 21 at page 4 of the Brief, much of it is misplaced to
the extent it argues the disclosed invention. Contrary to the
assertion made there, the examiner did not assert that Carlson
did not disclose or suggest a plurality of sponge floats, only
that the composition of them was not in Carlson but in Davis’
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007