Appeal No. 95-4860
Application No. 08/044,923
the pipe, (4) the plunger head is moved up and down by
reciprocating the (A) so as to forcibly remove the
obstruction, (5) the expandable seal (C) is disengaged from
sealing relationship with the pipe and (6) the plunger
apparatus is removed from the pipe (see page 2, line 89,
through page 3, line 5). In our view, it would not have been
obvious to provide the plunger apparatus of O’Connor with a
“supporting” or centering device as taught by Streich at 78
inasmuch as there is neither reason nor need to provide the
plunger apparatus of O’Connor with such a centering device.
In the first place, the plunger apparatus of O’Connor only
extends into the pipe in which it is to be used a relatively
short distance and, in the second place, the seal (C) and the
plunger (B) of O’Connor would already inherently function to
center or “support” that portion of the plunger apparatus that
is inserted within the pipe.
We have carefully reviewed the teachings of Leroy but
find nothing therein which would overcome the deficiencies
already noted with respect to O’Connor and Streich.
In view of the foregoing we will reverse the rejections
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 of 15-19 based on the combined
9
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007