Appeal No. 97-0928 Page 5
Application No. 08/353,190
base, at 104 [sic, 105]. Further details of the preferred
interconnection between the soft elastomeric collar of FIG.
6 and the flange of the hard plastic base are shown in
copending application Ser. No. 07/136,610, incorporated by
reference herein for those details of an overmolding between
the soft elastomer collar 102 and hard plastic base 105.
In our opinion, Figure 6 of Hasty does not clearly disclose
an upstanding dome portion having a solid flange. In fact, it is
our determination that the schematic showing in Figure 6 of Hasty
would be insufficient for one skilled in the art to know if the
inwardly projecting flange at the top of the hard plastic base
105 was solid or not. Thus, Hasty does not teach a "solid
flange" as recited in all the claims under appeal. Furthermore,
as correctly pointed out by the appellant, the flange of the hard
plastic base shown in copending application Ser. No. 07/136,610,
now U.S. Patent No. 4,864,782, incorporated by reference by
Hasty, is not a "solid flange."
Since the claimed "solid flange" is not taught either
explicitly or implicitly by the teachings of Hasty, we are
constrained to reverse both the examiner's rejection of claims 1,
3 through 11, 14 and 17 through 21 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as
being anticipated by Hasty and the examiner's rejection of claims
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007