Appeal No. 2000-1613
Application No. 09/178,053
within the jurisdiction of this Board, being reviewable by
petition under
37 CFR § 1.181. In re Mindick, 371 F.2d 892, 894, 152 USPQ
566, 568 (CCPA 1967).
The basis of the rejection is stated in detail on pages 3
and 4 of the final rejection (Paper No. 4), and need not be
repeated here. In essence, the examiner’s position is that
(id., page 3):
It would have been obvious to a person of
ordinary skill in the art the time the invention
was made to have attached a mounting angle 24
[of Roth] to the clamp main body portion 10 [of
Klingel] because one would have been motivated,
in view of Roth, to have provided a means for
supporting a bracket horizontally to support
pipes or cables.
We will not sustain this rejection. The clamp disclosed
by Klingel is for the purpose of connecting a (ground) wire 20
to a rod 19. While Roth does disclose apparatus 24, 30
attached to a rod 14, the purpose of Roth’s device is to
connect a strut 26 to a rod 14 of a suspended (hanging
support) system 12 in order to prevent oscillation of the
system by bracing the pipe hanger 18 supported at the end of
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007