Appeal No. 2006-1853 Page 11
Application No. 10/051,573
in the form of apertures therein. (Whiten, column 5, lines 5-7). The first device
includes a chassis (58) sized to receive a component (B) of the first device where at
least a portion of the chassis defines at least a portion of the first mounting
pathway. Whiten further discloses a support spar or support means (54) sized to be
received by the first mounting pathway and to engage the equipment cabinet and
extending substantially transversely between the first and second sides of the
equipment cabinet to support the first device therein. (Whiten, Figure 1 and
column 5, lines 7-12). The appellants on page 12 of their Brief make a conclusory
statement that Whiten’s tracks (58) do not have a chassis that is sized to receive a
component of a device, but they fail to explain why the combination of track (58)
and bottle (B) would not constitute a device, with track (58) being the chassis and
bottle (B) being a component received within the track (58).
We also sustain the examiner’s rejection of dependent claim 7, which
depends from claim 1 and further requires that the support spar engage the first and
second sides of the equipment cabinet. As shown clearly in Figures 1 and 2 of
Whiten, the support spar (54) engages the sides (10, 14) of the equipment cabinet
via the adapter (40) and front and rear uprights (20, 22). The claim does not
require that the support spar “directly” engage the sides of the equipment cabinet.
It is reasonable to interpret “engage” within the context of the specification as
allowing for indirect engagement of the spar with the sides, because the
specification discloses such an embodiment. The specification describes that the
support spar abuts first and second mounting rails (32, 34) and can be held against
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007