Appeal No. 1998-0169
Application 08/542,603
OPINION
We have carefully reviewed the rejections on appeal in
light of the arguments of the appellants and the examiner. As
a result of this review, we have determined that the applied
prior art does not establish a prima facie case of
anticipation or obviousness with respect to the claimed
subject matter. Accordingly, we will reverse the rejections
of the claims on appeal.
It is our finding that Abbate discloses a fastener for
fastening a water closet or toilet to the closet flange
attached to the floor in a bathroom. The fastener of Abbate
has a first elongated stud portion with a foot portion rigidly
attached thereto and discloses using a fastener on the
threaded part of the stud portion. In this respect, our
findings are in congruence with the findings of the examiner.
However, the examiner makes the further finding that the ring-
shaped closet flange 4 of Abbate could be used as a bone
implant. Examiner's Answer at 4, line 1. The examiner has
included no evidence or a convincing line of reasoning to
support this factual finding. Since it is not readily
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007