Appeal 2007-0585
Application 10/338,813
1 1. A tri-level auto rack railcar comprising first, second, and third
2 decks capable of supporting automotive vehicles during loading, unloading
3 and transport of such vehicles in commercial rail service, wherein the second
4 deck has fixed end sections that extend across the entire width of the deck
5 and contribute strength and rigidity to the railcar structure.
6
7 THE REFERENCES
8 Fylling US 3,801,177 Apr. 2, 1974
8 Klag
9 US 6,273,004 B1 Aug. 14, 2001
9 Lewin
10 US 6,283,040 B1 Sep. 4, 2001
11
12 THE REJECTIONS
13 The claims stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as follows: claims 1-7, 10
14 and 11 over Fylling in view of Lewin, and claims 8 and 9 over Fylling in view of
15 Lewin and Klag.1
16 OPINION
17 We affirm the aforementioned rejections.
18 Claims 1-7, 10 and 11
19 Fylling discloses “a frameless, relatively light railroad shipping container for
20 compactly supporting a tier of several heavy articles, such as motor vehicles, while
21 protecting the vehicles from vandalism and accidental damage” (Fylling, col. 1, ll.
22 6-10). Vehicles are positioned one above each other in three tiers in each
23 container, and preferably a railroad flatcar carries four containers (Fylling, col. 2,
24 ll. 44-55). The containers are formed as subassemblies that are welded together at
1 The Examiner omitted, apparently inadvertently, Lewin from the rejection of
claims 8 and 9 (Ans. 4). The Examiner relies upon Klag only for the subject
matter in claims 8 and 9 which depend from claim 3 to which Lewin is applied, see
id. Hence, we consider claims 8 and 9 to be rejected over the combined teachings
of Fylling, Lewin, and Klag.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013