Appeal No. 1999-0632 Page 7
Application No. 08/744,692
structure including support stanchions (cylindrical mounting
posts 39, 40), a work surface (apparently the top surface of
base storage cabinet 11) and a cabinet (modular unit 10)
disposed over the work surface (final rejection, page 3). The
examiner asserts that Friedman discloses the invention as
claimed "except the stanchion extending completely through the
openings in the lower panel and work surface." To overcome
this deficiency, it is the examiner's position that
Boundy et al. teaches the use of stanchions (80)
attached rear corners of [sic] and that extend
completely through an opening (90) of a lower panel
into an interior space (Figure 2). It would have
been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at
the time of the invention to modify the stanchions
of Friedman with the teachings of Boundy et al., to
insure a secure and better mounting of the stanchion
to a lower panel of the cabinet. Furthermore, it
would have been an obvious multiplicity of parts to
modify the stanchion of Friedman to extend
completely through the openings of both the lower
panel and work surface, as Boundy shows the
conventional use of a stanchion extending completely
through an opening, for better stability [final
rejection, pages 3 and 4].
We agree with the appellant (brief, pages 5 and 6) that
the teachings of Boundy of a mounting arrangement for an
electrical upfeed housing, in a non-weight-bearing
environment, would not have suggested modification of the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007