Appeal No. 2004-1150
Application No. 09/924,490
In light of the foregoing, we shall sustain the rejection of
claims 1, 13, 14, 18, 37-39, 41, 50, 52, 54 and 66 as being
unpatentable over Ellzey in view of Thomas.
We shall not sustain the rejection of claims 20, 43, 45, 56,
57 and 59. Each of these claims calls for at least one friction
stir butt welded joint that joins at least two extruded integrally-
stiffened wing panel sections. The examiner has not addressed this
claim feature and it is not apparent to us how the combined
teachings of Ellzey and Thomas teach, suggest or imply joining wing
sections comprising extruded integrally-stiffened panels. Hence,
the § 103 rejection of these claims cannot be sustained.
Summary
The anticipation rejection of claims 1, 13, 18, 38 and 52 is
affirmed.
The obviousness rejection of claims 1, 13, 14, 18, 20, 37-39,
41, 43, 45, 50, 52, 54, 56, 57, 59 and 66 is affirmed as to claims
1, 13, 14, 18, 37-39, 41, 50, 52, 54 and 66, but is reversed as to
claims 20, 43, 45, 56, 57 and 59.
The decision of the examiner is affirmed-in-part.
14
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007