Appeal No. 2004-0658 Page 10
Application No. 09/419,579
by a spring operatively engaging, in tensioned condition, a portion of the support
member and the actuating member, and a member fabricated of two separable portions
each bound to the other by fusible material which when fused at a predetermined
temperature permits the two separable portions to be released, thus activating the heat
sensor. Sullivan further teaches that the heat sensor operates in conjunction with a
canister of compressed gas and a horn which are operatively associated with the heat
sensor to sound an alarm when the heat sensor is activated. As shown in Figure 1, the
heat sensor 1 includes compressed gas canister 10, horn assembly 20 and valve
actuation means 50.
Claims 2, 3, 7 and 8
With regard to claims 2, 3, 7 and 8, the appellants argue (brief, pp. 3-5) that the
subject matter of these claims is not suggested by the combined teachings of the
applied prior art. Specifically, the appellants argue that there is no teaching, suggestion
or motivation in the applied prior art to have modified Cameron's warning sign to have
the warning/signaling device disposed within a vertical segment of the staff. We do not
agree.
In our view, Cameron discloses in Figure 7 that the horn unit 154 is disposed
within a vertical segment of the staff. Additionally, it is our conclusion that the teachings
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007