Appeal No. 2005-0844 3
Application No. 10/397,807
independent claim 1 will be specifically treated. Per appellants’ grouping, claims 2
through 19 will stand or fall with our determination concerning the patentability of
claim 1.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given careful consideration to
appellants’ specification and claims, to the applied prior art references, and to the
respective positions articulated by appellants and the examiner. As a consequence of
our review, we have made the determination that the examiner’s above-noted rejection
of claims 1 through 19 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) will be sustained. Our reasons follow.
According to the examiner, McCarthy discloses the invention substantially as
claimed including a worksurface (36, 46) and a power and communications assembly
(2) mounted to the worksurface. The assembly is said to include a housing (4) with a
lower housing having a clamp receiving interface and a bottom access opening (through
which electrical power cord (6) extends), an electrical power receptacle (12), a clamping
receiving interface (e.g., 22 or 50, 52), and an electronic circuit within the housing. The
examiner acknowledges that McCarthy does not disclose that the circuit in the above-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007