Appeal No. 1998-0861
Application No. 08/542,231
Claims 7 and 8 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
being unpatentable over Blaha in view of Williamson . 1
Reference is made to the brief and the answer for the
respective positions of the appellant and the examiner.
OPINION
All of the claims on appeal require deformable polygonal-
shaped elements on the outer surface of a twist-on connector
that prevent a tool from applying excessive torque to the
twist-on connector. The examiner acknowledges (Answer, page
4) that Swanson lacks such deformable polygonal-shaped
elements on the outer surface of the wire connector 10. The
polygonal shape and the wings alluded to by the examiner
(Answer, page 4) are on the inner surface of the Swanson
connector (Figure 5, element 28; Figure 4, element 24), and
they are not deformable upon application of torque by a tool.
Swanson discloses ribs 12a and 12b (Figures 1 and 2) on the
outer surface of the connector that function as “torque
1Inasmuch as claims 7 and 8 depend from independent claim
1, a proper rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) must include
Swanson in the combined teachings of Blaha and Williamson.
For this reason, we will review this rejection as if Swanson
was included in the combined teachings applied by the
examiner.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007