Appeal No. 95-2898
Application 08/053,193
wall portions is each formed with the stopper ledge, the first
and second wall portions being alternately arranged. Of course,
the claim language does not preclude each wall portion from
having both a claw and a stopper ledge and, if the spring-loaded
mechanism of Azuma were applied in place of protrusions 56 in
Kikuchi, then the walls of Kikuchi which are formed by these
protrusions would have both a claw [element 10 of Azuma] and a
stopper ledge [element 9 of Azuma]. The problem, as I see it, is
that even as modified by the spring-loaded mechanism of Azuma,
each of the three boss walls 55, separated by slits and walls 58
having protrusions 56, would have neither a claw nor a stopper
ledge. If the walls 58 having protrusions 56 in Kikuchi are
considered the claimed “first wall portions each of which is
formed with one of said claws,” then walls 55 must be the claimed
“second wall portions.” However, the claim requires these
“second wall portions” to be formed “with said stopper ledge,”
and they would not be in the modified version of Kikuchi. If we
consider walls 58 to be the second wall portions, with walls 55
being the “first wall portions,” then there are no claws on the
“first wall portion” in the modified version of Kikuchi. The
problem comes about because only one of the first and second wall
15
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007