Appeal No. 2004-1074
Application No. 09/924,772
the termination ends of the pins,3 and any like interpretation of
Cohen’s pins is unreasonable. Thus, while the combined teachings
of Cohen and Okamoto arguably would have suggested overmolding
plastic about Cohen’s filter assembly 18, the resulting structure
would still lack response to the limitations in claims 1 and 13
requiring a plastic pin holder overmolded about portions of the
termination ends of the terminal pins for rigidly supporting the
termination ends for connection to appropriate conductors.
Accordingly, we shall not sustain the standing 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) rejection of independent claims 1 and 13, and dependent
claims 2 through 4, 6, 8, 9, 14 through 16 and 18, as being
unpatentable over Cohen in view of Okamoto.
As the other references applied by the examiner do not cure
the above noted shortcomings of Cohen and Okamoto relative to the
subject matter recited in parent claims 1 and 13, we also shall
not sustain the standing 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) rejection of
dependent claims 5 and 17 as being unpatentable over Cohen in
view of Okamoto and Uchiyama, the standing 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
rejection of dependent claim 7 as being unpatentable over Cohen
3 Indeed, the appellants’ specification and drawings
describe and show the termination ends 16b of terminal pins 16 as
consisting of a swaged head portion limited to the extreme tail
end of the pin.
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007