Appeal No. 97-1400
Application 08/394,409
the compliant section so the portion below
the bottom of the slot is short so it does
not project below the bottom of most circuit
boards and projects minimally below the
bottom of thin boards. This is accomplished
while maintaining a high retention force, by
making the beams of a length that is at least
half the board thickness and by providing the
outer sides of the beam with convex surfaces
of moderately large radius of curvature.
Claims 1, 10 and 13 are representative of subject
matter on appeal and a copy of those claims may be found in the
Appendix to appellant's brief.
The prior art references of record relied upon by the
examiner in rejecting the appealed claims are:
Rozmus 5,078,612 Jan. 7, 1992
Zell 5,090,912 Feb. 25, 1992
Prochaska et al. (Prochaska) 5,106,328 Apr. 21, 1992
Claims 1 and 3 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Prochaska in view of Rozmus.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007