Appeal 2007-2596
Application 10/370,634
2. PRIOR ART
The Examiner relies on the following references:
Klein US 2,837,776 Jun. 10, 1958
Hunter US 3,437,359 Apr. 8, 1969
Lüthi US 5,469,677 Nov. 28, 1995
3. ANTICIPATION
Claims 13, 14, and 21 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as
anticipated by Klein (Answer 3).
The Examiner cites Figure 2 of Klein as disclosing a post-tensioned
concrete structure with concrete members 10, 12, 14, and 16, “a tubular
structure 26 . . . defining an unfilled void through the concrete member, at
least one tensioned stainless steel strand 17 . . . passing through the void and
anchored at opposite ends of the concrete member” (Final Rejection 2). The
Examiner states that the “anchor members 19, 21 [are] secured to the at least
one steel strand at each end of the concrete member wherein the concrete
member is compressed by the stainless steel strand” (id.).
Appellant argues that Klein’s building is not a “post-tensioned”
structure, as that term is understood by those skilled in the art (Br. 12-13).1
Rather than compressing a concrete member, Appellant argues, “Klein's
tensioned stranded wire structures 17 freely extend through vertical passages
26 of intermediate stories 12. They are anchored at lower story 10 and roof
14; however, the tension allows for the stretching of compression springs 20,
not compression of lower story 10 and roof 14” (id. at 13).
1 Appeal Brief filed August 3, 2006.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013