Appeal No. 2006-0104 7
Application No. 10/055,440
connector portion includes “an inwardly tapering surface complementally configured for
mating with said receiving surface of said vessel in sealing engagement.” Indeed, as
pointed out by appellants in both the brief (page 11) and reply brief (pages 2-3), the
examiner himself seems to recognize that AKI has no inwardly tapering receiving
surface on the portal rim and complementally configured inwardly tapering surface on
the connector portion of the riser. See, particularly, the first paragraph on page 5 of the
answer, wherein the examiner expressly concedes the failings of AKI to teach such
structure.
For the above reasons, we will not sustain the examiner's rejection of claim 1 under
35 U.S.C. 102(b) as being anticipated by AKI.
As for the rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) based on AKI in view of Jones
and Hall, we agree with appellants’ assessment set forth in the brief (pages 11-20) and
reply brief (pages 8-10). Simply stated, neither the concrete encasement (36) of Jones
which surrounds and is spaced from the riser (20) therein (col. 3, lines 35-40), nor the
extender rings (15) of Hall provide any teaching, suggestion or incentive for modifying
the riser of the tank assembly seen in AKI so as to result in the structure claimed by
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007