Appeal No. 1999-1719 Page 8
Application No. 08/787,700
view that Harbom does not teach or suggest a J-channel member
integral with a door frame and containing integral drains as
recited in claim 7. Accordingly, we will not sustain the
examiner's rejection of claim 7 as being anticipated by Harbom
under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b).
Claims 2 through 6 depend from claim 1 and the examiner's
rejection of claims 2 through 6 will not be sustained for the
same reasons as stated above with respect to claim 1.
Claims 8 through 12 depend from claim 7 and the
examiner's rejection of claims 8 through 12 will not be
sustained for the same reasons as stated above with respect to
claim 7.
CONCLUSION
To summarize, the decision of the examiner to reject
claims 1 through 12 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) is reversed.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007