Appeal No. 2004-1977 Page 5
Application No. 09/297,256
We turn next to the rejection of claims 1-7 and 9-14 as being unpatentable over
Diquattro in view of Lockwood. Independent claim 1, as discussed above, calls for an
extinguishing medium source consisting of a long (i.e., one hundred meters or more in
length) tube. Independent claims 13 and 14 recite an extinguishing medium source
which consists essentially of a long tube which has a length of “at least two hundred
meters” and “at least about 1 km,” respectively.
The examiner’s rejection of claims 1-7 and 9-14 suffers from the same deficiency
as the above-discussed anticipation rejection of claim 1. Specifically, the examiner has
not explained how Diquattro and Lockwood, even if combined, would have taught or
suggested an extinguishing medium source which consists essentially of a tube of at
least one hundred meters (claim 1), at least two hundred meters (claim 13) or at least
about 1 km (claim 14).
Diquattro is directed to a coolant-dispensing system for preventing fire in, for
example, a jet aircraft, by cooling hot metallic parts and comprises liquid coolant
receptacles 16a-c in communication with medium under pressure in a receptacle 10 via
a conduit 14 and manifold 12. Valve 15 in conduit 14 is normally closed but is opened
by a solenoid or other actuator under the control of a switch which responds to or is
operated in anticipation of collision or crash of the aircraft to send the pressurized
medium into receptacles 16a-c, thereby causing discs 28 in the outlets of the
receptacles to burst releasing coolant to supply points 1-8. The receptacles 16a-c may
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007