Appeal No. 2006-1845
Application No. 10/350,875
The appellant argues that the appellant’s claims require a
drain disposed beneath the floor level (brief, page 9). That
limitation does not appear in the claims.
The appellant argues that Letner’s channels both conduct
liquid and provide support for the subbase, and that Letner’s
drain traps water under the feet of the user as it delays the
passage of waste water to the sump (brief, page 9). Those
features are not excluded by the appellant’s claims.
The appellant argues that Letner’s drain is not a single
drain and does not run substantially the length of the interior
space because an accepted meaning of “run” is measured in a
straight line (brief, page 9). The components of Letner’s
drain, in combination, form a single drain. The appellant’s
disclosure does not limit “run” to a straight line. The
definitions of “run” provided by the appellant include “to lie
in or take a certain definition”. Letner’s drain meets that
definition.
The appellant argues that Letner and ACSI are not
combinable because ACSI discloses transverse floor drains
(brief, pages 9-10). ACSI is not needed for a disclosure of the
appellant’s single drain running substantially the length of the
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007