Appeal No. 97-3030
Application No. 08/254,181
to know basic skills apart from that which is explicitly
described by the references and appellants’ arguments to the
contrary are not well taken.
We will not sustain the rejection of claims 15, 17 and 18
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Pons Pons, Hedden and Hung.
Claim 15 recites a "thermal barrier slot for inhibiting
the transfer of heat along the porcelain enamel metal
substrate." The examiner relies on Hung for a teaching,
pointing to feature 348 in Figure 12 and "column 19, lines 62-
64" [sic, column 10?], of Hung, of a resistance circuit board
with a thermal barrier for thermal isolation between the
resistors. The examiner then concludes that it would have
been obvious to provide a thermal barrier slot in the heater
board of Pons Pons in view of Hedden to better control the
thermal pattern of the heating element. See page 7 of the
principal answer.
We are in agreement with appellants’ reasonable argument
that while Hung does disclose a barrier slot in a printed
circuit board within a surge protector, there would appear to
be no reason to extend such a teaching to the air freshener of
Pons Pons, or to the air freshener of Pons Pons as modified by
12
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007