Appeal No. 1998-2902
Application No. 08/452,107
plate 24 having protrusions and a means 32 for electrically connecting the conductive plate
24.
A quick review of Eyerly reveals that element 32 is a conductive connector strap for
conductively connecting the conductive plates 24 but there is absolutely no indication in
Eyerly of any “grounding;” certainly no grounding by the conductive strap 32. Further, the
examiner does not specifically identify what it is in Figure 3 of Eyerly that is being relied on
for the claimed “protrusions.” If the protrusions are formed by the spaces into which the
bolt heads 36 are inserted, it is debatable whether these “protrusions” can be considered
as being “integrally fixed” to a plate. The electrically conductive plate of the claim is said by
the examiner to be conductive plates 24 of Eyerly yet the “plurality of electrically conductive
protrusions integrally affixed to the plate” would also need to be the same conductive
plates 24, so where, in Eyerly, are the claimed protrusions separately identified, but
integral with, the electrically conductive base plate? Moreover, to whatever extent there
are such protrusions identified in Eyerly by the examiner (and we are of the opinion that
such protrusions have not been properly identified by the examiner), there is absolutely no
teaching or suggestion in Eyerly of providing a ground “when the protrusions...are engaged
into the earth,” as required by claims 1 and 10.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007