Appeal No. 1999-2765 Page 11
Application No. 08/752,396
The argument advanced by the appellants (brief, pp. 3-6)
is unpersuasive for the reasons set forth by the examiner
(answer, pp. 4-7) which we hereby incorporate by reference.
It is our view that Hunts discloses the recited complementary
coupling means for releasable coupling of the at least one
wall element to the bracing structure since the claimed
bracing structure is readable on the structure shown in Figure
1 absent the uppermost panel 10 and the recited wall element
is readable on the uppermost panel 10 when that panel is
connected to the already built structure. Furthermore, the
recited fittings are readable on Heilig's transverse beams and
the complementary coupling means for mounting of the fittings
on the at least one wall element is readable on the
perforations 8 in walls 6 and the pins of the transverse beams
which engage the perforations 8.
For the reasons set forth above, the decision of the
examiner to reject claim 1, and claims 2, 3, 8 and 9 which
fall therewith, under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is affirmed.
CONCLUSION
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007