Appeal No. 96-2247 Page 7
Application No. 08/218,488
perpendicular intersecting sets of fiberglass elements, wherein
the open area between the fiberglass elements exceeds about 40%
of the total shroud area.
The examiner, at pages 3-4 of the answer, determined that
Wilde discloses the basic claimed structure including a
marine spar platform with an essentially cylindrical vessel
50, a shroud 52 surrounding the vessel and standoffs 73, 77,
78. Not disclosed by Wilde is the particular claimed shroud
including intersecting sets of elements.
The examiner then determined that Tallman and Every teach shrouds
of two essentially perpendicular intersecting sets of elements
and concluded that
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in
the art at the time the invention was made to form the
shroud of Wilde in the manner taught by Tallman and Vortex
[Every] including two essentially perpendicular intersecting
sets of element [sic, elements] in order to provide improved
fluid flow past the cylindrical vessel. Additionally, it
would have been an obvious choice of engineering design to a
person of ordinary skill in the art at the time the
invention was made to form the shroud of Wilde, as modified
by Tallman and Vortex [Every] above, of the particular
dimensions for improved flow and of fiberglass for high
strength.
The appellants' argue (brief, pp. 3-4) that a prima facie
basis for the rejection is not presented by the applied prior
art. We agree. It is our opinion that Tallman and Every would
not have suggested modifying Wilde's shroud 52 to be two
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007