Ex Parte Wertz et al - Page 5




          Appeal No. 2003-1908                                                        
          Application No. 09/747,608                                                  


          dispositive issue with respect to the anticipation rejection of             
          claims 1 through 5, 8 through 10 and 12 is whether Takeuchi meets           
          the limitations in independent claims 1, 8 and 12 requiring                 
               a center section attached to the body section between                  
               the two arms whereby an electrical component lead can                  
               be held approximately in an orthogonal orientation to                  
               the body section and between the center section and the                
               two arms, said electrical component lead being in                      
               electrical contact with the center section and the two                 
               arms.                                                                  
               The examiner, finding correspondence between the center                
          section, body section and two arms recited in the appellants’               
          claims and the second lip 7, axial wall member 2 and projecting             
          lips 4 and 6 disclosed by Takeuchi, submits that the Takeuchi               
          contact or receptacle 1 is inherently capable of holding an                 
          electrical component lead approximately in an orthogonal                    
          orientation to the body section and between the center section              
          and the two arms with the electrical component lead being in                
          electrical contact with the center section and the two arms as              
          recited in claims 1, 8 and 12.                                              
               The appellants counter that Takeuchi does not teach or                 
          suggest anything of the sort and that the contact or receptacle             
          disclosed therein is not capable of performing the specified                
          function.  The following passage from the main brief fairly                 
          summarizes the appellants’ position:                                        


                                          5                                           




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007