Appeal No. 2000-1469
Application 08/808,789
having flanged portions along its longitudinal edges and a
plurality of segregated, longitudinally extending, parallel
passageways. As
conceded by the examiner (see page 3 in the final rejection),
this panel, which has a generally flat or planar
configuration, does not meet the limitations in claims 20 and
21 requiring the claimed panel to have a two-dimensionally
(claim 20) or three-dimensionally (claim 21) curved surface
formed at a central portion thereof. The examiner’s reliance 1
on Mori to overcome this deficiency is not well founded.
Mori discloses a panel structure adapted for a variety of
uses in a vehicle including as a roof panel. One of Mori’s
objects is to provide a panel having a substantially uniform
stiffness without the need for variations in thickness (see
column 1, lines 61 through 64). To this end, and as described
by Mori, “[a]t least an intermediate portion 21 of the panel
20 is formed as including a curved surface having a
1Read in light of the underlying disclosure (see, for
example, specification page 5 and drawing figure 4), the two-
dimensionally curved surface is one which is curved in the
longitudinal (Y-Y) direction of the panel and the three-
dimensionally curved surface is one which is curved in the
longitudinal (Y-Y) and transverse (X-X) directions of the
panel.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007