Appeal No. 96-2862
Application No. 08/030,704
1567 (Fed. Cir. 1990), Specialty Composites v. Cabot Corp.,
845 F.2d 981, 986, 6 USPQ2d 1601, 1604 (Fed. Cir. 1988) and
In re Sneed, 710 F.2d 1544, 1548, 218 USPQ 385, 388 (Fed. Cir.
1983)). Here, the members 20, 22 which the examiner has
identified as corresponding to the claimed plurality of spaced
fingers having thickened tips are merely portions of a single,
loop-like body 6. The examiner recognizes this but,
nevertheless, takes the position that these portions can be
considered to be separate fingers connected by a U-shaped
portion. In our view the examiner is attempting to expand the
meaning of this claimed terminology beyond all reason.
Consistent with the appellants’ specification, we can think of no
circumstances under which one of ordinary skill in this art would
interpret the single, loop-like body 6 of Schuplin to comprise a
plurality of spaced fingers having thickened tips as the examiner
asserts. This being the case, we will not sustain the rejections
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 of claims 7, 10-13 and 23 based on the
combined teachings of Hutchison and Schuplin and of claim 24
based on the combined teachings of Hutchison, Schuplin and
Muirhead.
Under the provisions of 37 CFR § 1.196(b) we make the
following new rejections.
11
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007