Appeal No. 95-3444
Application 08/037,304
patent attached to appellants’ brief. On the other hand, we do4
not find any dictionary definition of “tab” which would encompass
a depression, nor do we consider that, given its ordinary and
accustomed meaning, “tab” would include the projections and/or
recesses 33a and 33b disclosed by Beberman.
Secondly, even if the Beberman recesses might be construed as
“tabs,” they are not “press formed” from “a portion of the
material from the second opening,” as recited in claim 1. While
this claim language is somewhat inartfully drafted, it is evident
that when read in light of the disclosure at page 25, lines 24 to
30 of appellants’ specification, this language is intended to mean
that the tab is formed from some of the material that would
otherwise be removed in forming the second opening. Although it
is certainly true that in the Beberman plates 33 to 38 the hole
for the bolt 64 and the depression 33b are both formed from the
material which constitutes the plate, as the examiner indicates on
page 4 of her answer, the recess (“tab”) of Beberman is not press
formed from “a portion of the material from the second opening”
(emphasis added), as claimed, but rather the recess is formed from
a portion of the material that surrounds the second opening.
4Patent No. 5,072,848
-5-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007