Appeal No. 1997-0262
Application 08/286,795
claims, to the applied prior art references, and to the
respective positions articulated by appellants and the
examiner. As a consequence of our review, we have made the
determinations which follow.
Looking first at the examiner's rejection of claims
1 and 8 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b), we note that the examiner’s
position with regard to independent claim 1 seems to be that
Sakakida’s cover (24a, 24b), seen in Figures 8-10, can be
removed for repair or replacement by merely removing the nuts
(153, 155) and separating the tabs on the ends of the tethers
(151) from the bolts (152, 154), without disturbing the
connection of the tethers to the casing (21) at members (29)
and (131). Like appellants, we find this position to be
untenable. When the cover (24a, 24b) of Sakakida is in the
position seen in Figure 8 of the patent, i.e., with the cover
closing the panel opening (1a) and the tethers (151)
interconnected between the cover and the bracket (29) of the
airbag housing via holding members (131) and pins (135)
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007