Appeal No. 96-2653
Application No. 08/395,681
initially underlying the cylindrical portion of the sleeve but
movable radially outwardly upon axial advancement of the sleeve
relative to the elastomeric element to lock the grommet in the
aperture in the workpiece is not met by either Stewart's grommet
or the modified grommet. While both Stewart's grommet and the
modified grommet would have an inwardly extending flange (see
skirt 11 shown in Schmitt's Figure 1), the inwardly extending
flange is movable outwardly to the position shown in Schmitt's
Figure 2 only when the bolt 14 is tightened thereby forcing
washer 15 to engage the outer end of the skirt 11 and compress it
axially toward surface 7. Thus, the inwardly extending flange
is not movable radially outwardly upon axial advancement of the
sleeve relative to the elastomeric element.
Since all the limitations of independent claim 1 are not
taught or suggested by the applied prior art, the examiner has
failed to meet the initial burden of presenting a prima facie
case of obviousness. Thus, we cannot sustain the examiner's
rejection of appealed claim 1, and dependent claim 2, under
35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Schmitt in view of
Stewart.
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007