Appeal No. 97-0677
Application No. 08/312,710
On pages 5-6 of the brief, the appellants argue that
the outer surface of the body portion of Pyzytulla's
drum is not positioned in a tangential plane in close
proximity to a tangential plane along the outer
surface of the handling ring. . . . [and that]
one skilled in the art considering the teachings of
Ames '847 in combination with Pyzytulla '642 . . .
would not decrease the energy absorbing capability of
Pyzytulla's "crumple zone" by moving the transition
ring radially inwardly.
Thus, the appellants argue that the limitation that the "body
portion outside surface is positioned in a tangential plane in2
close proximity to a tangential plane along said handling ring
outer surface" is not taught by Pyzytulla and that the combined
teachings of Pyzytulla and Ames would not have suggested this
limitation.
It is an essential prerequisite that the claimed subject
matter be fully understood. Analysis of whether a claim is
patentable over the prior art under 35 U.S.C. § 103 begins with
2We read the terminology "outside surface" as referring
back to the previously recited "outer cylindrical surface" of
the body portion. Accordingly, we suggest that claim 1, as
well as claim 4 which contains the same language, be amended
to change "outside" to --outer-- for better antecedent basis.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007