Appeal No. 96-4139
Application 08/142,276
In light of this definition, the transition between
Chevalier's protrusion 24 and the needle shaft 11 is not "smooth
in all directions", as required in claim 1. In particular, as
shown in Figure 5, the transition between the protrusion 24 and
the shaft 11 at the right-hand side 47 of the protrusion is a 90E
corner, which is not a continuously even surface and therefore
would not meet the definition of "smooth".
The examiner also seems to indicate that the apparatus shown
in Figure 1 of Chevalier may constitute an anticipation. In this
apparatus, indicated as prior art, the protrusion 44 is disclosed
as being "a drop of silver solder on the barrel of the needle"
(col. 3, lines 29 and 30). This disclosure does not anticipate
the claims, however, because claim 1 requires that the protrusion
be formed as part of the hollow shaft portion of the needle,
whereas Chevalier's drop of solder is separately applied to the
shaft. Also, it does not appear, or is at best speculative, that
the transition from the drop of solder to the shaft of the needle
would be "smooth in all directions", given the definition of
"smooth" discussed above. Since Chevalier does not disclose,
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007