Appeal No. 97-0970
Application 08/307,348
clear intent of Van Allen. In this regard, we again agree
with the arguments made by appellant on pages 7 through 14 of
the brief, in the reply brief, and also in paragraphs 9
through 14 of the declaration filed November 24, 1995 (as an
attachment to Paper No. 9), which declaration was entered and
considered by the examiner (see the advisory action, Paper No.
10, mailed December 5, 1995).
Construing subparagraph d) of appellant’s claims 1, 6 and
15, and subparagraph e) of claim 12 in light of appellant’s
disclosure, we understand each of these claim recitations to
require that the actuator therein cause the entirety of the
valve
member (24) to be unseated (i.e., moved out of engagement with
the seating face or surface (61)) prior to shifting of the
valve member to the other position. Note particularly, page
9, lines 15-17, of appellant’s specification, wherein it is
indicated that
the valve member “moves to its second position by shifting
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007