Appeal No. 2005-0255 Page 6
Application No. 10/190,475
a seam, as shown in Figure 6, at the end of the opening 28. The portions 44, 38 on the
end of the arm 40 are disposed against the surface of the transition section 12 on each
side of the opening 28 so that the ferrule extends the full width of the terminal as is
apparent from Figure 4.
The appellant argues (brief, pp. 4-5) that:
In Applicants' invention, the sleeve of the contact piece is not closed, i.e.
the end of the bent portion is not fixed to the opposite portion and the open
sleeve enables the contact piece to fit different shapes and forms and the flexible
web of Applicants' invention permits easy bending of the first portion with respect
to the second portion with the advantages set forth in the second paragraph on 7
of the application as filed and these advantages are in no way taught by the
Swengel et al patent.
As pointed out in the second paragraph on page 6 of the application,
Applicants' construction has a first portion 3 and a second portion 5, which two
portions are connected by a connecting web 7. This connecting web permits the
bending of the second portion 5 relative to the first portion 3 through up to 90°
opposite to the opening direction of the U-shaped first portion 3. As pointed out in
the paragraph bridging pages 10 and 11, angling of the second portion with
respect to the first portion is infinitely effected with ease, and this is not possible
with the connection portion 12 of Swengel et al. The flat transition portion 12 of
Swengel et al is not ''inherently flexible'' and, therefore, is not capable of
performing Applicants' easy bending of the second portion with respect to the first
portion so as to form an angle. Therefore, Swengel et al does not anticipate
Applicants' invention.
In our view, claim 13 is met by Swengel. In that regard, claim 13 is readable on
Swengel's terminal 6 as follows:
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007