Appeal No. 1997-2856
Application 08/394,251
Skwirut discloses that tubular U-shaped bulbs were known
in the prior art (e.g., col. 1, lines 31-32). Skwirut's lamp
has a U-shape which is then bent in half to form another
U-shape. In view of these express teachings, it would have
been obvious to use a simple U-shaped lamp in Skwirut if one
did not desire the added light provided by the extra lengths
of straight lamp sections. Such a U-shaped lamp would meet
the maximum dimension limitation of claim 5 as evidenced by
comparing U-bent segment 31a in figure 7 with straight segment
24a in figure 5 of Skwirut. We do not think Appellant can
seriously claim to have invented the U-shaped lamp having a
screw-base, which is all that claim 5 appears to recite. For
these reasons, we conclude that claim 5 would have been
obvious. Claims 6 and 8 have not been separately argued and,
therefore, fall with claim 5. The rejection of claims 5, 6,
and 8 are sustained.
As to claims 10 and 11, Appellant argues that claim 10/11
recites that "a flat plane disposed perpendicular to the
central axis and intersecting one of the cylindrical lamp
segments anywhere along its total length creates a
cross-sectional pattern that ... includes nothing but cross-
- 13 -
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007