Court Opinions
State Laws
|
Ex Parte LENOIR et al - Page 7
Legal Research Home >
Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences > 2003 > Ex Parte LENOIR et al - Page 7
Appeal No. 2002-0531 Page 7
Application No. 09/108,687
known electrical characteristic, and a person skilled in the art would understand what
the term 'impedance' means." (Appeal Br. at 9.) The examiner responds that
"[i]mpedance is well known in the art." (Examiner's Answer at 8.) Because the
appellants and the examiner agree that impedance is a well known property, we
conclude that one skilled in the art would understand the claimed "impedance."
5. Second Air Chamber
The examiner asserts, "[f]rom the specification and figures, it does not appear
the configuration of the contacts is changed to form the 'second air chamber.'"
(Examiner's Answer at 4.) The appellants argue, "[t]he description of this feature can
be found on pg. 4, lines 1-10. " (Appeal Br. at 9-10.)
Claim 9 recites in pertinent part "a contact supporting section in the housing
including a passageway for each of the signal and ground contacts, and wherein the
intermediate section of each signal contact includes a reduced height portion forming a
second air chamber in a portion of the passageway. . . ." For its part, the section of the
specification referenced by the appellants explains that "impedance can be further
improved by a special design of the intermediate sections 22 of the signal
contacts 7. . . ." (Spec. at 4.) More specifically, "[a] part of the intermediate section 22
is removed so that air is present as dielectric along this removed length of the
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Last modified: November 3, 2007
|
|
