Appeal No. 98-1532
Application No. 08/438,533
of the references would have resulted in structure that solves
this problem. In this regard, the upper surface of the
shields of both Leite and Block are flush with the surface of
the ground, and therefore are incapable of protecting a
sprinkler head that is above the ground.
With this as prelude, we direct attention to the
requirement in claim 1 that the cover comprise “a single
molded piece” that has a dome shaped upper surface and a flat
bottom surface. The Leite device is a circular disk
comprising a single piece which has a flat upper surface and a
flat bottom surface. Block is of multiple piece construction,
and has a dome shaped upper surface and a dome shaped bottom
surface. From our perspective, even if there existed proper
suggestion to combine these references, the result would not
be a single molded piece device, as required by the claim but,
at best, the dome of Block installed upon the flat disk of
Leite, and the rejection fails at this point. And, continuing
on this theme, since both references teach providing a central
aperture of such diameter as to grip (Leite) or engage (Block)
the sprinkler, the combined teachings would not have motivated
one of ordinary skill in the art to make the aperture large
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007