Appeal No. 1999-0972
Application 08/724,340
aptly summarized by the following excerpt:
[t]he Gay ‘629, Grant ‘453 and Sawtell ‘968
[references] all disclose insulation with individual
packets, batts or blankets sized in width to fit the
normal or standard width of the cavities being
insulated. . . . However, none of the references
relied upon in the final rejection disclose, teach
or suggest the concept or structure of the
insulation assembly of the present invention for
insulating an elongated building cavity wherein the
relative widths of the elongated insulation modules
of the insulation assembly and the standard nominal
cavity width of the elongated cavities to be
insulated are such that at least two of the
elongated insulation modules are required to
insulate a cavity having the nominal standard cavity
width as defined in the claims [brief, pages 5 and
6].
This line of argument is persuasive with respect to
claims 38 through 66, but not with respect to claims 1 through
16 and 18 through 26.
Turning first to the 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) rejection of
claims 1 through 6, 9 through 11 and 19 through 24 , Gay
discloses “a thermal insulation packet for fitting into the
space above a basement wall between floor joists” (column 2,
lines 13 through 15). Figure 2 illustrates “a series of
thermal insulation packets connected in manufacturing, and
before tearing apart for individual application” (column 2,
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007