Appeal No. 1999-1538
Application 08/661,733
and 4b for attaching the spring member 39 to the respective fixing member 8 and lens
holder member 4. Notwithstanding appellants’ correct argument in the supplemental brief
that the protrusions 8b and 4b do not protrude vertically from the holder, the combined
teachings and showings of the two references relied upon by the examiner would have
clearly suggested this feature anyway since the examiner relies upon the base reference of
Narumi as to that feature. Moreover, in accordance with the contribution of Ikegame set
forth in the initial Figures 1-4, the showing at Figure 5 clearly illustrates what appears to be
a vertical boss 14 projecting upwardly or vertically from the fixing member 8 in this figure,
thus illustrating the vertical projection of a protrusion from the holder in accordance with
claim 5 on appeal. In the context of Narumi, the claimed combining hole obviously would
mate with these various protrusions or bosses in the illustrated but unlabeled pads 41 in
Figure 9 of Narumi. Therefore, we are unpersuaded of appellants’ arguments with respect
to the rejection of claim 5 on appeal. Since appellants have presented no arguments with
respect to dependent claims 6 and 7 in addition to the statement that these claims fall with
their respective independent claim 5 on appeal at page 6 of the principal brief on appeal,
claims 6 and 7 fall with our consideration of independent claim 5 on appeal.
On the other hand, we reach an opposite conclusion with respect to the rejection of
claim 8 on appeal. This claim requires that the plurality of protrusions protrude horizontally
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007