Appeal No. 97-2611
Application 08/299,101
have "opposite edges each having a lead-side end which
obliquely extends in a direction away from a corresponding one
of said plurality of leads at said boundary portion to form an
obtuse angle between said lead-side end of the terminal body
and said corresponding one lead," we will first consider the
question of whether it would have been obvious to provide the
admitted prior art terminal body with this feature. As noted
above, the examiner cites Spencer as evidence of obviousness,
since Spencer
discloses terminal bodies (leads) 72 having tapered portions
74. However, each of the Spencer leads is to be inserted into
a spring insert B in socket A which is positioned in a hole
through a circuit board C, and the taper 74 is at an angle to
match the angle of beveled surfaces 30, 50 on the socket and
insert, respectively, in order to "provide[] a surface area
for electrical contact between the leads and the socket" (col.
5, lines 12 to 16). By contrast, in the admitted prior art
structure there would be no reason to taper the leads and/or
terminal body for the purpose disclosed by Spencer, because
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007