Appeal No. 1999-2259
Application 08/711,614
defining a centrally located passage extending longitudinally
from a first end of said surge clamp to a second end of said
surge clamp.
In Arguments, Appellant asserts that there is no teaching
or suggestion in either Rinderer or Slicer that would lead one
skilled in the art to discover the stated problem, or the
solution to that problem as described and claimed in the
application. Brief at page 9. The problem, Appellant states,
“is concerned with eliminating the large inventories of
manufactured surge clamps (and storage space) required for the
various busway enclosure widths, and further, to eliminating
the manufacturing processes required to make those surge
clamps.” Brief at 9. The Appellant maintains that Slicer’s
disclosure of the surge clamp is not sufficient to teach or
suggest the prior art features and manufacturing processes
required to discover the problem solved by the extruded surge
clamp of the present invention. Brief at 9. Appellant
continues, “[t]he problem, as stated in the present
application and solved by the extruded surge clamps of the
present invention, has nothing to do with ‘strength and
rigidity’.” Brief at page 9. Additionally, Appellant asserts
that there is insufficient disclosure in Slicer to suggest the
12
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007