Appeal No. 95-4860
Application No. 08/044,923
threaded hub 24 of the anchor 13 has the capability of being
threaded on and off the outer shaft 11 as desired and, thus,
the anchor 13 is inherently “removably supported” (independent
claim 12) or “removably coupled” (independent claim 15) on the
outer shaft 11. This being the case, there is adequate
descriptive support for these limitations and we will not
sustain the rejection of claims 12-22 under 35 U.S.C. § 112,
first paragraph.
Turning now to the rejection of claim 12 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(b) and the rejection of claims 13 and 14 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 as being unpatentable over Grunsky, each of these
rejections is based on the examiner’s view that the anchor 29
of Grunsky can be considered to be “removably supported” as
set forth in independent claim 12 because the “anchor 29 is
removable when the end 15, the seal 19 and collar 25 are
removed” (see answer, page 4). We must point out, however,
that independent claim 12 expressly requires that the
intermediate support
form a support for said elongated support shaft to
maintain alignment of said support shaft and [sic,
with respect to] said major axis of said pipeline
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007