Appeal 2006-1989 Application 09/772,278 Patent 5,996,948 (2) Whether Appellants have established the Examiner erred in rejecting claims 1, 2, and 5 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) because claimed limitations are not taught by Buff? FINDINGS OF FACT The following findings of fact are believed to be supported by a preponderance of the evidence. A. The Invention 1. Appellant invented a wire chafing stand. The wire chafing stand permits multiple wire chafing stands to be nested and readily separated from one another without causing wedging. (Specification, col. 1, ll. 51-53). 2. Appellant states at column 3, lines 21-27, that: FIG. 1-6 . . . illustrate a pair of nested wire chafing stands 10 of identical construction with each stand 10 including an upper rim 12 of any desired geometry, such as oval, square or rectangular, and a lower rim 14 of a geometry substantially identical to that of the upper rim 12. 3. Appellant states at column 3, lines 29-32, that: The upper rim 12 is spaced apart from the lower rim 14 by wire legs 16 so that the upper and lower rims are in a substantially parallel relationship. - 5 -Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013