Appeal No. 2000-0185
Application 08/847,111
the time appellants’ invention was made to “employ in Iwasaki
et al a first section with a hardness greater than a second
section for the purpose of providing rigidity and strength as
recognized by... [Lusen or Weber].”
Even if we assume that the Lusen and Weber patents are
analogous art to the heat exchanger assembly and seal
disclosed and claimed by appellants and the heat exchanger
module seen in Iwasaki, a point in some doubt, we must agree
with appellants’ position that the prior art teachings relied
upon by the examiner (i.e., the oven gasket seal of Lusen and
the bearing seal of Weber) would appear to be insufficient to
have suggested to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time
of appellants’ invention the making of any modification in the
seal arrangement of Iwasaki as urged by the examiner. In the
first place, the sealing requirements and the problems being
solved by the applied references to Iwasaki, Lusen and Weber
are very different one from the other and from that confronted
by appellants. Moreover, there is no indication in Iwasaki,
or for that matter in Lusen or Weber, that the foamed plastic
seal (103) of Iwasaki is in any way deficient as to its
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007