Appeal 2006-2171
Application 10/840,715
example of bilge pump operation by using a timer to accumulate successive
operating intervals of the bilge pump (Price, col. 3, ll. 17-30). In the
example, Price states that “if the bilge motor operates during seven two-
minute intervals over a one hour period, the timer will be accumulated to
fourteen minutes” (Price, col. 3, ll. 26-28). From this disclosure, Price
suggests taking into account the number of times the pump is activated (i.e.,
“if the bilge motor operates during seven two-minute intervals” (emphasis
added)).
Based on Price’s disclosure, it would have been obvious to one of
ordinary skill in the art to combine Price’s bilge water monitoring system
and method that include an electronic circuit or control unit for counting the
number of times a pump is activated using a timer for determining the rate of
leakage with Herzhauser’s stuffing box water containment and removal
system and method to avoid the catastrophic results caused by excessive
water leakage disclosed by Price (Price, col. 1, ll. 27-34).
Accordingly, we sustain the Examiner’s § 103(a) rejection of argued
claims 10, 11, 13 and 26 and non-argued claims 12, 14-17, 25, 31, and 34-
36.
CLAIM 18
Claim 18 ultimately depends on claim 13 and further recites that the
“mounting structure” for attaching the containment vessel “comprises a shaft
log.”
The Examiner rejected claim 18 under § 103(a) over Herzhauser in
view of Price. The Examiner found that Herzhauser, the primary reference,
taught mounting a containment vessel to a “shaft log” (Answer 8). The
11
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013