Appeal No. 2003-0091
Application No. 09/298,640
limitation is not well taken. Although Schimmelpenningh’s
penetration resistant sheet (PVB interlayer 7) extends from the
edges of interior and exterior transparent sheets (glass layers 5
and 6) before the laminated glass panel 10 is inserted into the
inner rigid channel 8 and autoclaved therewith, the excess PVB
takes the form of a self-sealing adhesive 9 in the finished
window and, as is evident from Schimmelpenningh’s drawing figure,
no longer extends from edges of the exterior and interior sheets
in a direction substantially parallel with planes defined by the
exterior and interior sheets.
Accordingly, we shall not sustain the standing 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) rejection of claim 1 and dependent claims 2, 3, 5
through 11 and 18 through 21 as being unpatentable over
Schimmelpenningh.
On the other hand, it is not apparent, nor has the appellant
cogently explained, why Schimmelpenningh’s laminated glass panel
10, with its penetration resistant sheet (PVB interlayer 7)
extending from the edges of interior and exterior transparent
sheets (glass layers 5 and 6), is not fully responsive to the
laminated window glass recited in independent claim 22. That
this laminated glass panel constitutes an intermediate product
does not diminish its status as a valid reference against the
10
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007