Appeal No. 2002-1443 Page 9
Application No. 09/251,833
radiation, and therefore the reasoning set out above also is applicable here. The
rejection of claim 28 and claim 29, which depends therefrom, is not sustained.
Dependent claim 20 recites that the insulation upon which the heating elements
are mounted extend above the side walls of the container within which it is positioned.
The examiner has cited Schreder for this teaching. Be that as it may, Schreder does
not alleviate the shortcomings pointed out above in the combination of references
applied against claim 1, from which claim 18 ultimately depends. Therefore, we will not
sustain the rejection of claim 20.
Schreder was also applied against dependent claim 26. For the same reason as
is set forth immediately above with regard to claim 20, we will not sustain the rejection
of claim 26.
Dependent claim 21 stands rejected on the basis of Adamson and Person, taken
further with McWilliams, cited for teaching securing a heating element by means of
staples. The problems with the rejection of claim 1, from which claim 21 depends, are
not cured by McWilliams and thus we will not sustain this rejection.
CONCLUSION
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007