Appeal No. 97-0441
Application No. 08/511,841
matter set forth in appellant’s independent claim 17 on
appeal.
If anything, it would appear to us that one of ordinary
skill in the art would have been led by the combined teachings
of the applied references to merely incorporate the automatic
toilet seat arrangement of Veal into the toilet of Kimball so
as to gain the benefits of such an automatic seat arrangement,
while also employing and maintaining the water recycling
system as disclosed in Kimball. As urged by appellant in the
brief and reply brief, there is nothing in either Kimball or
Veal which addresses varying the desired maximum water level
in the toilet tanks disclosed therein as a possible water
conservation measure, or which would have been suggestive to
one of ordinary skill in the art that the amount of water used
in flushing a toilet can be controlled or varied by placing a
vertically adjustable electrical float switch in the toilet
tank to control an electrically operated solenoid valve, which
in turn controls the inlet water to the tank and the volume of
water admitted to the tank to thereby control the desired
water level in the tank.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007