Appeal No. 2000-2147
Application No. 08/835,709
Claim 6 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Batty in view of Storck.
Claim 16 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Batty in view of Wegmann and Storck.
Reference is made to the briefs (paper numbers 18 and 20)
and the answer (paper number 19) for the respective positions of
the appellant and the examiner.
OPINION
We have carefully considered the entire record before us,
and we will reverse the 35 U.S.C.§ 102(b) rejection of claims 1,
2, 5 and 7 through 12, and the 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) rejection of
claims 3, 4 and 6. On the other hand, we will sustain the 35
U.S.C. § 103(a) rejection of claims 13 through 22.
Except for “a raceway comprising: a housing, substantially
equal in length to a distance between said location on said floor
and said support of said structure, having a conduit . . . ; and
a fastener . . . , said fastener and said housing cooperating to
integrate a floor cover with said raceway,” the remainder of
claim 1 is couched in intended use language that will or may
occur at a future date. As a result of the same intended use and
future tense language, claim 13 is only directed to “a raceway
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007