Appeal No. 2001-0045 Page 5
Application No. 09/103,347
and of “extension,” which is “a section forming an additional length.”4 Based upon
these definitions, taken in the light of the description of the invention in the appellants’
specification and the arguments in the Brief, we interpret “in lateral extension of said
vertical uprights” to mean that the spaced equipment mounting structures must be
attached to the vertical uprights and must form additional sidewardly oriented sections
of the vertical uprights.
Applying the foregoing to the rejection, we cannot agree with the examiner that
element 20 of Anderson as shown in Figure 2 is “in lateral extension” of vertical upright
12 merely because it is located to the left thereof, as shown. Element 20 can be
considered to be attached to vertical upright 12 through unistrut 18 and vertical strut 19.
However, it appears to be located entirely inwardly of vertical upright 12, and therefore
is not, in our view, “in lateral extension” of the vertical upright. This being the case,
Anderson does not disclose or teach all of the subject matter recited in claim 1, and we
will not sustain the rejection. It follows that we also will not sustain the like rejection of
claims 2-9, which depend therefrom.
The same limitation is present in independent claims 10 and 18, and therefore
we will not sustain the rejection of claims 10 and 18 or of depending claims 11-14, 16,
17, 19 and 20.
4See, for example, Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary, 1973, pages 650 and 406, respectively.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007