Appeal No. 2002-2254 Page 5
Application No. 09/456,046
mat and a retaining wall, provides a means of effectively catching and retaining such
drips. As shown in the embodiment depicted in Figures 1-5, the mat 5 has an overall
rectangular shape. The weight of a barbecue grill rests on the mat and assists in fixing
the mat in place. The mat includes a retaining wall 15 which allows the mat to act as a
container for fluids which drip or fall onto the surface. The retaining wall of the mat
15 can be angled, curved (see Figures 3 and 4) or vertically disposed to the horizontal
surface of the mat. The mat has a generally flat bottom provided with projections from
the receiving surface 20, such as a grid of pyramids 25 (see Figure 2). The height of
the retaining wall can be higher or lower than the height of the pyramids. In the
preferred embodiment shown in Figure 1 the height of the walls and the pyramids is
uniform while in the alternative embodiment of Figures 6-7 the height of the wall 45 is
greater than the folds 40. Sandaj teaches (column 2, lines 40-44) that
[t]he location of the retainer walls is important only insofar as they should create
a container or collector for holding the spilled or dripping greasy liquids or oils.
The shape of the perimeter of the mat may be any desired shape, but a
preferred embodiment is rectangular in over all design.
The appellant argues (brief, p. 4) that a primary tenet in determining whether a
reference anticipates under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a) is that "only the CLAIMED designs are
to be compared." The appellant then asserts that the following features are not taught
by Sandaj: (1) a front drip edge, a rear drip edge, a left grease barrier, and a right
grease barrier forming an open upper volume where grease drippings and splatter may
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007