Appeal No. 97-4253 Page 8
Application No. 08/385,981
In regard to the recitations in claims 1 and 10
concerning the thickness of the insert, the examiner states
that:
Making Fragale/O’Hanlon’s insert one inch
thick would also have been an obvious
design consideration for one of ordinary
skill in the art, based upon the amount of
reinforcement desired for the corner
member--the longer the insert, the more
reinforcement provided to the corner member
and the more “filler” to prevent insects,
weather, etc. from entering the corner’s
interior. [examiner’s answer at page 6]
We do not agree with the examiner. Fragale discloses
that the foam insert is utilized to provide additional
structural rigidity to the panel. A foam insert that was
either significantly less than the length of the corner piece
as recited in claim 1 or a thickness that was on the order of
one inch as recited in claim 10 would not provide this
support. O’Hanlon discloses that the insert provides
additional structural rigidity to the panel. A foam insert
that was either significantly less than the length of the
corner piece or on the order of one inch would not provide
this structural rigidity to the panel. As such, we conclude
that the provision of the recited thicknesses would not have
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007