Appeal No. 97-2229
Application No. 08/094,748
have to encompass the curved upper portion of the hanger,
where the handle is located.
Thus, the subject matter discussed above is not found in
Bachmann, and the reference therefore is not anticipatory of
claims 1, 19 and 26 on this basis.
Claim 26 has another distinguishing feature, in that it
requires that the side edge portions be parallel to each
other, and that there be an upper edge portion which is
perpendicular to the side edge portions. This clearly is not
present in Bachmann. For the reasons set forth above, we
will not sustain the rejection of claims 1, 19 and 26.
All of the dependent claims stand rejected as being
unpatentable over Bachmann in view of Datlow, which discloses
a separator for hanging in a closet between stored garments.
Although not so stated in the rejection in Paper No. 14, it
would appear that Datlow is cited by the examiner for its
disclosure of utilizing materials other than those specified
in Bachmann, from which the examiner has concluded that one of
ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to
utilize the various materials specified in the claims. We
have discussed the shortcomings of Bachmann above with regard
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007