Appeal No. 96-1419
Application 08/081,971
of claim 12 under the second paragraph of § 112. We also cannot
sustain any of the other rejections of the appealed claims.
With regard to the § 102(b) rejection, the cited Schuplin
patent discloses a pipe hanger which is described as being
secured by nails to a wooden joist. Schuplin’s hanger does have a
slot 16, permitting one clamping portion to be flexed to an
opened position relative to another clamping portion to permit a
pipe to be inserted in a circular aperture defined by the two
clamping portions. However, the opposed hanger surfaces defining
slot 16 are straight, not curvilinear as required by claim 1.
Furthermore, Schuplin does not contain a disclosure that a
mounting surface of the hanger abuts a portion of a vehicle about
the wing window opening of the vehicle door as required by claim
1. In addition, the flexure of Schuplin’s hanger does not require
one clamping portion to be hinged to the other clamping portion
as required by claim 1.
Since Schuplin does not expressly or inherently disclose
each and every element of the invention defined in claim 1, it
follows that the Schuplin patent is not a proper anticipatory
reference for the subject matter of claim 1 and also for claims 2
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007