Appeal No. 97-0677 Application No. 08/312,710 On pages 5-6 of the brief, the appellants argue that the outer surface of the body portion of Pyzytulla's drum is not positioned in a tangential plane in close proximity to a tangential plane along the outer surface of the handling ring. . . . [and that] one skilled in the art considering the teachings of Ames '847 in combination with Pyzytulla '642 . . . would not decrease the energy absorbing capability of Pyzytulla's "crumple zone" by moving the transition ring radially inwardly. Thus, the appellants argue that the limitation that the "body portion outside surface is positioned in a tangential plane in2 close proximity to a tangential plane along said handling ring outer surface" is not taught by Pyzytulla and that the combined teachings of Pyzytulla and Ames would not have suggested this limitation. It is an essential prerequisite that the claimed subject matter be fully understood. Analysis of whether a claim is patentable over the prior art under 35 U.S.C. § 103 begins with 2We read the terminology "outside surface" as referring back to the previously recited "outer cylindrical surface" of the body portion. Accordingly, we suggest that claim 1, as well as claim 4 which contains the same language, be amended to change "outside" to --outer-- for better antecedent basis. 5Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007