Appeal No. 2006-0376
Application No. 09/971,866
Rejection of claim 6.
Appellant argues on page 14 of the brief “[I]n the claimed invention, the
movement of the auxiliary burner is achieved by using a mechanism which
includes a vertical guide structure having a plurality of positioning means
disposed thereon, and a spring-latch attached to the auxiliary burner for
temporarily and disengagably fixing the position of the auxiliary burner, on the
guide structure, in relation to the cart.” Further, appellant argues that Harneit
does not disclose this feature.
The examiner identifies on page 5 of the answer, that Reynolds teaches
the spring-loaded latch as items 48 and 49 of figure 6. We concur with the
examiner. Claim 6 includes the limitation “ a spring loaded latch connected to the
auxiliary burner housing, for temporarily and disengagably fixing the position of
the auxiliary burner unit in relation to the cart.” As identified supra with respect to
claim 5, we find that Reynolds teaches that the auxiliary burner housing is
movable in the vertical direction and that item K, in conjunction with items 48
and 49, limits the vertical movement of the burner. See figure 6 and column 5,
lines 1-5. Accordingly, we find ample evidence to sustain the examiner’s
rejection of claim 6.
11
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007