Appeal No. 2001-0734
Application 09/071,264
the partition system seen in Pollock ‘386 is fully responsive to
that defined in appellants’ independent claims 31 and 44 on
appeal. In that regard, we note that the partition system of
Pollock ‘386 seen in Figure 9 includes an open-framework
partition (distinct from that portion of the partition system
carrying wall panel 110) wherein the partition includes an upper
horizontal frame member (21) having a first horizontal row of
discrete attachment points (e.g., 43 as seen in Figure 3, but un-
numbered in Fig. 1) capable of supporting a furniture unit2; and
a floor channel (20) like that defined in appellants’ independent
claims on appeal, having a second row of discrete attachment
points (e.g., 42, 43 as seen in Figure 3, but un-numbered in Fig.
1) corresponding to the first horizontal row of discrete
attachment points and also capable of supporting a furniture
unit.
Contrary to appellants’ arguments in their brief (pages 8
and 9), and as can be clearly seen in Figure 9 of Pollock ‘386,
2 As noted on page 1 of appellants’ specification, a
“furniture unit” can be an additional partition or other
accessory that is intended to be interconnected to the partition
in locations in front of the partition.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007