Appeal No. 98-2186
Application No. 08/517,946
on any fair teachings or suggestions found in Lestage and
Watkins. Like appellant, we note that both Lestage and Watkins
teach or suggest that the fan or pump member of the respective
systems therein be located at the discharge end of the
associated conduit (6 of Lestage and 16 of Watkins) instead of
being "connected to said air inlet end of said conduit means"
as required in claim 1 on appeal and "adjacent the [or a]
bottom floor" so as to remove air at the floor level and
discharge the air through the associated conduit to the
exterior of the building, as set forth in both claims 1 and 9
on appeal. As a further point, we observe with regard to this
rejection that the examiner has made no attempt at all to
address the limitations of claims 5, 8 and 13 on appeal. For
these reasons, we will not sustain the examiner’s rejection of
claims 1 through 5 and 8 through 13 on appeal under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103.
With regard to the examiner's rejection of claims 6, 7,
14 and 15 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 based on Lestage, Watkins and
Sassmann, we share appellant’s view as expressed on pages 9
and 10 of the brief, and again conclude that the examiner’s
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007