Appeal No. 96-3418
Application No. 08/317,135
Second, it does not couple one element of a system to another,
but is attached to the end of a water faucet. Third, as shown
and described, this device is an assemblage of parts into a
single item that comprises a central filter (B) flanked by a
pair of screens (l) that are installed in seats (m) and are
held in place by packing rings (n). From our perspective,
therefore, the examiner’s rejection of independent claims 1, 4
and 7 fails at the outset because each of these claims is
directed to a coupling and each requires that there be a
coupler and a nipple, none of which are present in Neracher.
Confirmation of this has been provided by the examiner, who
has tacitly acknowledged that the coupler and nipple are not
present by labeling the parts as a “coupler end portion” and a
“nipple end portion” in the enlarged view of the drawing that
is attached to the Answer.
Because all of the claimed subject matter is not found in
Neracher, the rejection of claims 1, 4 and 7 cannot be
sustained.
Independent claims 13 and 14 are directed, respectively,
to a coupler and a nipple. There is an analogy here with the
reasoning expressed above in that, in the context of the
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007