Appeal No. 1998-1357
Application No. 08/348,744
having an inner tank, an outer shell and insulating material
located between the inner tank and the outer shell, and we see
no incentive or motivation in the teachings of Lindquist, to
provide such a three-part or three-layer storage tank. We,
therefore, will not sustain the examiner's rejection of claims
109, 110, 114, 118,
122, 126, 128, 132, 138 and 139 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
being unpatentable over Lindquist.
Next, we turn to the examiner's rejection of claims 123,
135, 137 and 140 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Lindquist in view of Kettlewell. The patent
to Kettlewell shows a heated body, such as a tank, furnace or
boiler comprised of a cylindrical metal body 10, a casing 11
constructed around the body 10 and secured in spaced relation
thereto. An insulating space 12 is located between body 10
and casing 11 into which a quantity of loose expanded mica 13
is poured for insulation. The examiner's basic position is
that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in
the art to have employed the inner cylindrical tank teaching
of Kettlewell in the construction of the storage tank of
12
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007