Appeal No. 97-1002
Application 08/014,379
Although Farrar does teach a device for protecting
against voltage surges, the invention is for use in protecting
integrated circuit components which are packed into extremely
small spaces and for retrofitting existing electrical circuit
connectors. We fail to see how the Farrar device which is
designed for closely packed integrated circuits would have
relevance to the watt-hour meter of St. John. None of the
problems sought to be overcome by Farrar would be expected to
exist in the St. John watt-hour meter. Therefore, we agree with
appellant that the teachings of Farrar and St. John do not
suggest their combination in a manner to meet the invention of
claims 20 and 21.
We also agree with appellant that neither Farrar nor St.
John suggests anything comparable to a sidewise flexing contactor
as recited in claims 20 and 21. The items identified by the
examiner are simply apertures or contact points and have nothing
to do with contactors for contacting the protruding terminals of
a watt-hour meter as claimed. Thus, even if Farrar and St. John
could be combined as proposed by the examiner, there would still
be no teaching of the “sidewise flexing contactors” as recited in
claims 20 and 21. Therefore, we do not sustain this rejection of
claims 20 and 21.
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007