Appeal No. 1999-1765 Page 17
Application No. 08/839,193
We turn to the examiner’s rejection of independent claims
1 and 12 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over
Jabsen in view of Nylund. In that regard, we have already
discussed Jabsen and the fact that it does not show a tube
that is directly threadedly “attached to” or “attachable to”
the threaded opening 16A in grid 13, due to the presence of
bushing 27. We have also determined that Nylund (Figure 3)
shows a tube threaded throughout its length that has the
capability of being directly threadedly attached to a tie
plate, and has an end which is extendible through a tie plate
a sufficient distance to allow the end cap to be attached
thereto. However, since tube 12, 26 of Jabsen is neither
directly threadedly attached, nor directly threadedly
attachable to threaded opening 16A in grid 13, we see no
incentive or motivation in the teachings of the applied prior
art references to modify Jabsen by using the teachings of
Nylund, in the manner urged by the examiner. We, therefore,
will not sustain the examiner’s rejection of claims 1 and 12
under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Jabsen in
view of Nylund.
Page: Previous 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007