Appeal No. 97-2999 Page 9
Application No. 08/338,714
a tubular outlet 5, and a socket 10. An annular ridge 6 is
formed in the tubular outlet 5 to engage with an annular slot
7 formed in the inner wall of the cuff 8 and serves to secure
the cuff 8 firmly in position upon the end of the tubular
outlet 5.
After the scope and content of the prior art are
determined, the differences between the prior art and the
claims at issue are to be ascertained. Graham v. John Deere
Co., 383 U.S. 1, 17-18, 148 USPQ 459, 467 (1966).
Based on our analysis and review of Kujawski and claim
23, we agree with the examiner that the only difference is
that Kujawski utilizes a thread to secure conduit 10 (i.e.,
the body extension) to the ball 20 whereas claim 23 requires a
bead on the body extension cooperating with a recess in the
male ball to lock the male ball on the body extension.
With regard to this difference, the examiner determined
(answer, p. 6) that
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007