Appeal No. 2003-0371 Page 9
Application No. 09/465,941
this rejection is fatally defective. The rejection of claim 5 and claims 6-8, which depend
from claim 5, is not sustained.
Claims 12 and 13 stand rejected as being unpatentable over Woods in view of
Peeler. Claim 12 adds to claim 1 the requirement that the elongate members be
flexible, which is not disclosed or taught by Woods. It is the examiner’s view that it
would have been obvious to replace the solid elongate members disclosed by Woods
with flexible straps in view of Peeler’s teaching of the use of flexible straps in building
construction. However, we find ourselves in agreement with the appellants that, in fact,
no such straps are disclosed by Peeler; elements 14, to which the examiner refers, are
not straps but are slidable fabric cover sections (column 2, lines 27 and 28). On this
basis, the rejection of claim 12 and dependent claim 13 fails at the outset, and we will
not sustain it.
Claim 17 is directed to a method of packaging stringers in accordance with the
system of claim 1 for subsequent assembly at a jig. The method comprises the steps of
positioning a plurality of stringers in the releasable holders, forming the assembled
elongate members and stringers as a package, transporting the package to an aircraft
assembly jig, and lifting the support member by suitable means so as to unpack the
assembly and position the stringers at the jig for loading thereon. This claim also
stands rejected on the basis of Woods and Peeler. The examiner admits that Woods
does not form the assembled stringers as a package, transport the package to a jig,
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007