Appeal No. 1998-0839
Application No. 08/433,206
The prior art of record relied upon by the examiner as
evidence of obviousness is:
Kanai et al. (Kanai) 5,008,060 Apr. 16, 1991
Huff 5,246,065 Sep. 21,
1993
The admitted prior art as discussed on pages 1-4 of the
instant specification.
The Rejection
Claims 1 and 7 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
unpatentable over Huff in view of Kanai and the admitted prior
art as found on pages 1 through 4 of the specification.
According to the examiner, Huff discloses the basic process of
molding a gasket onto a heat exchanger tank. The examiner
notes that Huff uses projecting fingers 22 which are
selectively heated to soften the fingers and are deformed as
the gasket deformation means molds the gasket for the tank.
With respect to the secondary reference, the examiner states
that Kanai discloses the detailed process steps of urging and
guiding as claimed in the third and fourth method steps of
claim 1 on appeal. Furthermore, the examiner is relying on
the admitted prior art from appellants’ specification as
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007