Ex Parte Lodge

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

Sep 23, 2008

10859648 (B.P.A.I. Sep. 23, 2008)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________

BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________

Ex parte REGGIE LODGE
____________

Appeal 2008-1696
Application 10/859,648
Technology Center 3600
____________

Decided: September 23, 2008
____________

Before WILLIAM F. PATE, III, MURRIEL E. CRAWFORD and
LINDA E. HORNER, Administrative Patent Judges.

CRAWFORD, Administrative Patent Judge.

DECISION ON APPEAL

STATEMENT OF THE CASE
This is an appeal from the final rejection of claims 21 to 29.
The claimed invention is directed to rotary filing cabinet system
which includes a short adder cabinet lying between a tall starter cabinet and
a tall adder cabinet (Specification 2).

Appeal 2008-1696
Application 10/859,648

2
Claim 21, reproduced below, is further illustrative of the claimed
subject matter.
21. A rotary filing cabinet system, comprising:
a tall existing starter rotary filing cabinet comprising as
viewed from the front a left end panel mounted to a left corner
post, a left flexible strip mounted to the left corner post, a right
flexible strip, a rotor with shelving and a side panel, a width of
the side panel extending from the left flexible strip to the right
flexible strip, a right front corner post to which the right
flexible strip is mounted, and a right end panel; and
a short adder rotary filing cabinet kit which, when
assembled, forms a short adder rotary filing cabinet as an
abutting addition at a right side of the tall existing starter rotary
filing cabinet, said tall starter cabinet right front corner post
also being a left front corner post for said short adder cabinet so
that only one front corner post is provided between the tall
starter and short adder cabinets, said short adder rotary filing
cabinet kit comprising a cover panel for connection to the tall
starter cabinet right front corner post when placed above a top
of the short adder cabinet and after removal of said tall starter
cabinet right end panel, a left flexible strip for direct attachment
to the tall starter cabinet right corner post, a right flexible strip,
a rotor with shelving and a side panel, a width of the side panel
extending from the left flexible strip to the right flexible strip,
said width being substantially the same as said rotor side panel
width of said tall starter cabinet, and a right front corner post to
which is attached the right flexible strip.

The reference of record relied upon by the Examiner as evidence of
obviousness is:
Saravis US 6,557,955 B2 May 6, 2003

Appeal 2008-1696
Application 10/859,648

3

Claims 21 to 29 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable
over Appellant’s admitted prior art in view of Saravis.

OPINION
We have carefully reviewed the rejections on appeal in light of the
arguments of the Appellant and the Examiner. As a result of this review, we
have reached the conclusion that the applied prior art does not establish the
prima facie obviousness of the claimed subject matter. Therefore the
rejections on appeal are reversed. Our reasons follow.
The following comprise our finding of facts with respect to the scope
and content of the prior art and the differences between the prior art and the
claimed subject matter. Appellant’s admitted prior art depicted in Figure 2 is
a tall starter cabinet and two tall adder cabinet and as depicted in Figure 3 is
a short starter cabinet between two tall starter cabinets. The cabinet system
depicted in Figure 3 includes a short cabinet having a left front panel 2A and
a right front panel 2B.
Saravis discloses a snap together modular cabinet system which as
depicted in Figure 4 is a series of cubes 401 attached together with one panel
410 acting as a common panel shared between two cubes 401 (col. 5, ll. 23
to 25). We further note that Saravis does not disclose a short adder cabinet
as an abutting addition at the right side of a tall existing starter cabinet. In
addition, Saravis does not disclose that to assemble a short adder cabinet to a
tall starter cabinet the right end panel of the tall cabinet is removed or that a
cover panel is mounted.
Appeal 2008-1696
Application 10/859,648

4

The disagreement between the Appellant and the Examiner is with
respect to whether Saravis discloses a short adder cabinet or a method in
which the right end panel of a tall starter cabinet is removed and a cover
panel mounted. As found above, Saravis does not disclose a short adder
cabinet. In this regard we do not agree with the Examiner that the portion of
the Saravis cabinet system marked as B in the annotated figure at page 6 of
the Answer, is a short adder cabinet. Saravis clearly depicts a series of
cubical cabinets of the same height stacked together. Even if we were to
agree with the Examiner that the part of the cabinet system marked B is a
short adder cabinet, Saravis would not disclose or depict a tall cabinet
adjacent thereto but rather two short cabinets stacked one on the other. We
are thus in agreement with the Appellant that Saravis does not disclose a
short adder cabinet abutting at the right side of a tall existing starter cabinet.
As such, we will not sustain the Examiner’s rejection of claim 21 or claims
22 to 25 dependent thereon.
We also agree with the Appellant that Saravis does not disclose the
step of removing the right panel of a tall cabinet and mounting a cover panel
above the short adder cabinet. Firstly, Saravis does not disclose a short
adder cabinet. Secondly, the right panel between the cubes is not removed
in the Saravis system. Rather the right panel 410 of one cube forms a
common wall between cubes. As such, we will also not sustain the
Examiner’s rejection of claim 26 or claims 27 to 29 dependent thereon.
Appeal 2008-1696
Application 10/859,648

5

The Examiner’s decision is reversed.

REVERSED

vsh

SCHIFF HARDIN, LLP
PATENT DEPARTMENT
6600 SEARS TOWER
CHICAGO IL 60606-6473