Appeal No. 96-4097
Application 08/138,634
member 5 in its misaligned position engaged with the inner
wall surface, inhib-iting it from returning to its first
position, shown in Fig. 1, where it is aligned with the slot.
Element 4 of Rimanek therefore corresponds to the pin as
defined in claim 59.
Since Rimanek discloses every limitation of claim 59, and
appellants do not argue that claims 61 and 62 are separately
patentable, rejection (2) will be sustained.
Conclusion
The examiner's decision to reject claims 56 to 63 under
35 USC § 103 is reversed, and to reject claims 59, 61 and 62
under 35 USC § 102(b) is affirmed.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in
connection with this appeal may be extended under 37 CFR
§ 1.136(a).
AFFIRMED-IN-PART
IAN A. CALVERT )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007