Appeal No. 2000-0085
Application No. 08/802,582
Looking first at the examiner’s rejection of claims 1, 2
and 4 through 8 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable
over Brandon in view of McIntyre and Dernbach, we note that on
page 3 of the answer the examiner has urged that Brandon
teaches that a relief valve located between the aircraft outer
wall and an outboard seat track is well known “except for the
relief valve being a thin film having apertures, seams, and
frame.” In addition, the examiner has urged that McIntyre
teaches that frangible means to relieve pressure in the
aircraft environment is well known in the art and that
Dernbach teaches that “a frangible means with apertures, seam,
and frame 6 to relieve pressure is well known in the art”
(answer page 3). From these teachings, the examiner concludes
that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in
the art at the time appellants’ invention was made “to have
used a frangible film having apertures, seams, and frame 6 in
place of Brandon’s relief valve as taught by McIntyre et al.
and Dernbach et al. to save weight and to relieve pressure so
that damages can be prevented” (answer, pages 3-4).
Appellants assert (brief, pages 4-5) that the Dernbach
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007