Appeal No. 2002-1533
Application No. 09/055,377
member 40 and an wall inner member 16 spaced apart to define
therebetween a refrigerant compartment 58 that is filled with a
suitable refrigerant 42. When assembled, the exterior cup 14 and
the outer wall member 40 of the cold cell assembly are spaced
apart to form a dead air space 38 therebetween. Staggs explains
at column 22, lines 53-59, that the dead air space is made up of
room air that is trapped inside the device when the parts are
assembled. Staggs prefers to use dead air space rather than
rubber or plastic foam insulation because dead air has no cost,
yet possesses excellent thermal insulating properties (column 27,
lines 45-59).
In proposing to combine Zimmerman and Staggs to reject
claims 1, 10-12 and 39, the examiner submits (answer, page 4)
that
[i]t would have been obvious at the time the invention
was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art
to employ in Zimmerman et al. the outer shell being
comprised of . . . a double, insulation plastic wall
with insulation (i.e., evacuated air, rubber, plastic
foam) therebetween . . . as disclosed in Staggs. The
claimed materials, shape and dimension are considered
to be obvious design expedients in view of the
materials and dimensions disclosed in Zimmerman et al.
and Staggs which do not solve any stated problem or
produce any new and/or unexpected result. It would
have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the
art at the time the invention was made to have the
claimed insulation . . . since it has been held to be
within the general skill of a worker in the art to
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007