Appeal 2007-2324
Application 10/629,775
Appellants argue that the cited references fail to disclose or suggest an
assembly with elements having the configuration required by claim 26 (Br.
5-6). Specifically, Appellants argue that Vonderhaar does not disclose that
the dimpled sections 136, identified by the Examiner as corresponding to the
cabinet holder, “are capable of joining support member 134, which is alleged
to be [the] claimed fire plate, to the side panel 11, which is alleged to be the
claimed side plate” (id. at 5). Appellants argue that even if Vonderhaar’s
item 82 is alternatively considered to be the cabinet holder, that structure
does not meet the limitation requiring the cabinet holder to have a plurality
of fastening pieces configured for insertion into the fire plate and the side
plate (id. at 6).
The Examiner responds that “the claimed configuration is reasonably
and broadly construed in light of Appellants’ specification, such that column
5 lines 4 through 22, discloses studs or pins which meet the structural and
function[al] limitation of the claimed fastening pieces” (Answer 7). The
Examiner urges that “[t]hroughout primary reference Vonderhaar, fastening
pieces are disclosed such that the claimed configuration of fire plate and
slide plate insertion are met by that reference” (id.). The Examiner cites
Vonderhaar as disclosing, at column 5, beginning at line 15, “studs or pins
86 . . . adapted for fastening main section cabinet holder 82 with cook top
cover 12 and fire plate 77 wherein the fire plate is between the side panel
plate 11 and the top cover. These studs or pins meet the claimed fastening
pieces configuration” (id.).
We do not agree with the Examiner that Vonderhaar discloses or
suggests the configuration of elements required by claim 26. Vonderhaar
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013