Appeal No. 1997-1812
Application 08/055,382
being unpatentable over Coffey in view of Wertz. Each of
these claims calls for seismic tie-down means disposed below
the floor surface of the turntable for preventing substantial
vertical upward displacement of the assembled panel units at
the peripheral edge of the floor surface. The examiner cited
Wertz for a teaching of “providing a turntable structure with
means (44, 46) which is capable of functioning as seismic tie-
down means to prevent substantial vertical displacement and/or
stabilize the panel units at the peripheral edge thereof”
(final rejection, pages 4-5). The examiner than concluded
that
it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art
to provide Coffey’s turntable structure with a
stabilize [sic, stabilization] means that is capable
of functioning as a seismic tie-down means as taught
by Wertz et al. to prevent substantial vertical
displacement and/or stabilize the panel unit at the
peripheral edge thereof. [Final rejection, page 5.]
Implicit in the above is the examiner’s conclusion that the
modified Coffey device would correspond to the subject matter
of claims 15 and 31.
While we appreciate that the guide members 44 and
circuitous channel 46 of Wertz provide a measure of lateral
19
Page: Previous 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007