Appeal No. 2005-0146
Application No. 10/274,635
in view of Long (id.). Claim 26 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as unpatentable over Miller in view of Englert (id.).
Based on the totality of the record, we affirm all of the
rejections on appeal essentially for the reasons stated in the
Answer and those reasons set forth below.
OPINION
A. The Rejection under § 102(b)
As discussed above, appellants state that claims 21, 25 and 28
stand or fall together (Brief, page 2). Since these claims are the
subject of the rejection based on section 102(b), we select claim
28 from this grouping and decide this ground of rejection on the
basis of this claim alone. See 37 CFR § 1.192(c)(7)(2003).
The examiner finds that Miller discloses a construction panel
for a wall comprising a gypsum core covered on both sides with
fibrous sheets of synthetic resin, such as nylon or polyester
fibers (Answer, page 3, citing col. 1, ll. 12-21, col. 1, l. 63-
col. 2, l. 3, and Fig. 2D). Accordingly, the examiner finds that
all claim limitations are described by Miller within the meaning of
section 102(b).
Appellants argue that Miller does not include a gypsum core
that is “covered on both sides” by fibrous sheets since Miller
teaches that it is essential that the openings in the pervious
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007