Appeal No. 2002-2107 Page 10
Application No. 09/160,085
For the reasons set forth above, the decision of the examiner to reject claim 4
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is affirmed.
Claims 9 to 11
We sustain the rejection of claims 9 to 11 under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
Dependent claims 9 to 11 add to parent claim 1 the further limitations that the
hanger portion is (1) coextensive with a width of the primary support wall; (2) integrally
formed with the primary support wall; and (3) formed as a one-piece construction with
the primary support wall. These limitations are clearly met by Williams for the reasons
set forth previously in our treatment of claims 1 and 2.
Accordingly, the decision of the examiner to reject claims 9 to 11 under
35 U.S.C. § 103 is affirmed.
Claims 7 and 8
We will not sustain the rejection of claims 7 and 8 under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
Dependent claim 7 adds to parent claim 1 the further limitation that the hanger
portion is an arcuately formed extension of the primary support wall, curving toward the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007