Appeal 2006-2796
Application 09/230,439
1 material, the Naka ‘951 edge bead cushion is elastic (col. 2, ll. 29-30) and, as
2 discussed above, is capable of having an H value comparable to that of the
3 Appellant’s working member. Moreover, the Naka ‘951 edge bead cushion has a
4 hollow interior that gives it additional flexibility (col. 2, ll. 33-36; fig. 2). Hence, it
5 appears that, like the Appellant’s working member (Spec. 4, 6), the Naka ‘951
6 edge bead cushion can flex when stepped on by a pedestrian (col. 4, ll. 58-60) such
7 that it is self cleaning.
8 The Appellant argues that Naka ‘951 does not disclose a working member
9 having an exposed treading surface adapted to be tread upon by pedestrians (Reply
10 Br. 3-4). The Naka ‘951 surface having serrations (17, col. 2, ll. 37-40; fig. 2) is
11 exposed and is adapted to be tread upon by pedestrians (col. 4, ll. 58-60).
12 We therefore are not convinced of reversible error in the rejection over
13 Naka ‘951.
14 Rejection over Naka ‘294
15 Naka ‘294 discloses a stair mat comprising a flexible synthetic resin edge
16 cushion cover (31) (which corresponds to the Appellant’s working member)
17 having at its lower edge an integral downward skirt (36) (which corresponds to the
18 Appellant’s vertical fastening member (col. 3, ll. 57-60)). A connecting sheet base
19 member (33) (which corresponds to the Appellant’s horizontal fastening member
20 and appears to be made of the same material as the edge cushion cover (col. 3,
21 ll. 51-53)) has a hook-shaped rib (40) in a catching groove (37) on the lower
22 surface of the edge cushion cover (col. 4, ll. 6-25; 41-46).
23 The Appellant argues that Naka ‘294 discloses a stair mat, not a facing
24 structure (Br. 17-18; Reply Br. 5; Supp. Reply Br. 3). That argument is not
25 persuasive for the reason given above regarding the rejection over Naka ‘951.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013