Appeal No. 1998-3016
Application No. 08/568,344
31-32) and in our view one of ordinary skill in the art would
have understood this to mean that Briggs' flange is coated
with the material (60). The term "embed" is defined as to
make an integral part of, or to fix firmly in a surrounding
mass.4 In our view to make an integral part of, or fix
firmly, would convey to one of ordinary skill in the art that
this is a coating. For this reason we will sustain the
examiner's rejection of claim 1 as anticipated by Briggs.
Accordingly, the decision of the examiner to reject claim
1 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as clearly anticipated by Briggs is
affirmed. As noted above, the appellants have grouped claims
1, 2 and 5 through 9 as standing or falling together. Thus,
it follows that the decision of the examiner to reject claims
2, 5 and 9 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) over Briggs is also
affirmed.
The 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection of claims 1, 2, 5 through 13 and
15 as being unpatentable over either Thurman or Briggs taken
in view of the general state of the art.
4 The American Heritage Dictionary, second college edition, page 447 (copy
enclosed with this decision).
9
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007