Appeal No. 97-4206
Application 08/662,263
admitted prior art in view of either Brooker or Favreau.
Rejections (2) and (3)
Each of these rejections is bottomed on the examiner's
view that it would have been obvious to form the flange of the
admitted prior art with "an inside corner of approximately 90E
having effectively a zero radius of curvature," in view of the
teachings of either Smith, Rohrer '142, Yamagishi or Herder;
however, each of these secondary references suffer from
generally the same deficiencies that we have noted above in
Rejection (1) with respect to the teachings of Brooker and
Favreau. That is, while each of the secondary references are
directed to latching devices for pivotally mounted blades
which have generally perpendicularly extending flanges that
can broadly be considered to have an inside corner with a zero
radius of curvature, none of the flanges are mounted on the
end of a spring arm. Instead, all the flanges are mounted on
the ends of rigid lever arms which pivot about a fixed axis.
Thus, for generally the same reasons we have stated above in
Rejection (1) with respect to the teachings of Brooker and
Favreau, we find nothing in the combined teachings of the
13
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007