Appeal No. 2000-1413
Application No. 08/650,883
Independent claims 31 and 32 are each directed to a
multi-layer pool cover which includes a lower reflective layer
that is to be in contact with the water when the pool cover is
in use. The lower reflective layer includes a plurality of
pockets integral thereto and a reflective surface (claim 31)
or a reflective surface film (claim 32) which reflects a
substantial amount of the heat radiating from the pool water
toward the lower reflective layer back into the pool water.
In rejecting claim 31 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as anticipated
by Yellott, the examiner urges that the over-layer (9) of
Yellott as seen in the position depicted in Figure 3 of that
patent constitutes a reflective surface as claimed. For the
reasons set forth on pages 14 and 15 of the brief, we find the
examiner's position to be in error.
From a complete evaluation of the teachings of the
Yellott patent and the article by Frank Edlin mentioned in
that patent at column 3, lines 21-28, it is apparent to us
that the transparent plastic over-layer (9) of Yellott is not
a reflective surface which acts to reflect a substantial
amount of the heat radiating from the pool water toward the
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007