Appeal No. 2000-1622
Application No. 08/752,445
in order to accommodate the flush tank 52. While the flush
tank might well be considered part of the water closet, we
believe that one of ordinary skill in the art, reading claim
72 in light of appellant’s disclosure (i.e., page 26 and Fig.
4) would interpret the term "height," as it relates to the
off-the-floor water closet, to mean the height of the top of
the bowl which is supported by the attachment means on the
front and/or back of the carrier. As so construed, claim 72
is not anticipated by Groeniger, since Groeniger’s carrier is
not of "approximately equal height" with the top of the water
bowl 55. Likewise, claims 78, 79, 81 and 85 are not
anticipated, and rejected (2) will not be sustained as to
them.
Rejection Pursuant to 37 CFR § 1.196(b)
Pursuant to 37 CFR § 1.196(b), claims 68, 70, 75 and 84
are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over
Groeniger. As discussed above, Groeniger meets all the
limitations of these claims, except that it does not disclose
that the carrier 50 is approximately the same width as water
closet 55. However, as far as Groeniger is concerned, carrier
50 will perform its function of supporting the water closet 55
12
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007