Appeal No. 2002-2341
Application 09/466,277
13, mailed January 17, 2002) and the examiner's answer (Paper No.
16, mailed June 4, 2002) for the reasoning in support of the
rejections, and to appellants’ brief (Paper No. 15, filed April
2, 2002) and reply brief (Paper No. 17, filed July 1, 2002) for
the arguments thereagainst.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given
careful consideration to appellants’ specification and claims, to
the applied prior art references, and to the respective positions
articulated by appellants and the examiner. As a consequence of
our review, we have made the determinations which follow.
In evaluating the rejection of claim 51 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(b), we share the examiner’s view that the walls (13, 14) of
the cardcage seen in Marks would correspond to appellants’
claimed first and second cardcage sides (i.e., when the cardcage
or printed circuit board rack of Marks is mounted in a control
cabinet in an upright or vertical orientation so that front
flanges (17) of walls (13, 14) and flanges (10) of end walls (8,
9) face upwardly and the printed circuit boards (4) are inserted
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007