Appeal No. 2003-1705 Page 3
Application No. 09/904,058
OPINION
Having considered appellant’s arguments set forth in the
brief and reply brief and the examiner’s position set forth in
the answer, we are not persuaded that the examiner has
established the obviousness of the claimed subject matter.
Accordingly, we will reverse the examiner’s rejection. Our
reasoning follows.
Izzi discloses a gasket (annular sealing ring) for use
between a toilet bowl and floor. Izzi (column 2, lines 52-59)
teaches that the flexible gasket may be made of elastic material
“that has a memory so that it returns to its original shape after
flexing to receive a toilet bowl in place . . . .”
Quandt (column 2, lines 47-54) discloses the use of
polyethylene foam as a tank drain and flange gasket material that
has “fluid-tight sealing characteristics” and is more economical
than elastomers.
Based on the combined teachings of Izzi and Quandt, the
examiner urges that it would have been obvious for one of
ordinary skill in the art to use polyethylene foam as a flexible
gasket (sealing ring) material that is adapted for positioning
between a toilet bowl and floor surface.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007