Appeal 2007-0403
Application 10/440,859
II. PRIOR ART
As evidence of unpatentability of the claimed subject matter, the
Examiner relies upon the following references:
Hjertstrand US 4,145,895 Mar. 27, 1979
Purdum US 5,899,088 May 4, 1999
Choy US 6,233,965 B1 May 22, 2001
Bostic US 6,266,972 B1 Jul. 31, 2001
III. REJECTION
The Examiner has rejected the claims on appeal as follows:
1) Claims 11 through 14 and 19 through 28 under 35 U.S.C. §
103(a) as unpatentable over the combined teachings of Bostic, Choy, and
Purdum; and
2) Claims 15 through 18 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
unpatentable over the combined teachings of Bostic, Choy, Purdum, and
Hjertstrand.
IV. ISSUE
1. Has the Examiner demonstrated that a person having ordinary skill
in the art would have been led to place an additional phase change
material (cooling medium) having a melting point different from
that of a first phase change material between two insulation layers
in Bostic’s shipping container or freezer pallet within the meaning
of 35 U.S.C. § 103?
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013