Appeal No. 2005-0768
Application No. 10/010,203
Once again, the examiner’s determination that the claim
language at issue reads on the applied reference is well founded.
Although Kiri does not describe them as “vibration isolators,”
each rubber 22 and either, or both, of the horizontal section of
bracket 21 and plate 23 associated therewith embody a
construction which (1) is structurally identical to the vibration
isolator recited in claim 2, i.e., a plurality of layers with at
least one layer (Kiri’s horizontal section of bracket 21 or plate
23) being a hard layer and at least one layer (Kiri’s rubber 22)
being a soft layer, and (2) will inherently function to isolate
vibrations.
Hence, the appellant’s position that the subject matter
recited in claim 2 distinguishes over that disclosed by Kiri is
not convincing. Consequently, we shall sustain the standing 35
U.S.C. § 102(b) rejection of claim 2 as being anticipated by
Kiri.
We also shall sustain the standing 35 U.S.C. § 102(b)
rejection of claims 10 through 14 as being anticipated by Kiri.
Claim 10 depends from claim 2 and requires each vibration
isolator to have a plurality of hard layers and a plurality of
soft layers wherein the hard layers and soft layers are
alternating. As best shown in Figure 1, the Kiri system includes
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007