Appeal No. 2006-0037
Application No. 09/874,371
claim 2, claim 6 stands or fall with claim 5, claims 8 and 9 stand
or fall with claim 7 and claims 11 and 12 stand or fall with claim
10 (see In re Young, 927 F.2d 588, 590, 18 USPQ2d 1089, 1091 (Fed.
Cir. 1991); In re Wood, 582 F.2d 638, 642, 199 USPQ 137, 140 (CCPA
1978)).
II. The merits
Russell, the examiner’s primary reference, pertains to visibly
transparent, heat reflective thermal control films suitable for
vehicular and architectural glazing applications. The vehicular
applications envisioned by Russell include windows, windshields,
windscreens, canopies, panes, and the like in vehicles such as
automobiles, trains, boats, aircraft, and spacecraft, while the
architectural applications include windows, viewports, skylights,
panes and the like in domestic and commercial buildings (see column
1, lines 32-42). The following passage from the reference explains
why thermal control films are used with glazing:
[w]hile windows often enhance the aesthetics and
functionality of buildings and vehicles, they can also
cause undesirable gain or loss of heat. In warm
climates, exterior heat may enter through windows,
thereby increasing air conditioning loads. In cold
climates, interior heat is lost through windows, thereby
increasing heating demands. . . .
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007