Appeal No. 98-2124 Page 7
Application No. 08/454,898
as the appellants would apparently have us believe, and it is
well settled that features not claimed may not be relied upon
in support of patentability. In re Self, 671 F.2d 1344, 1348,
213 USPQ 1, 5 (CCPA 1982). As the examiner has correctly
noted, the tail portions (i.e., spring contact arms 75,91) of
the contact members 74,90 of Biechler extend from an interior
surface of the housing (see, e.g., Fig. 5) and, thus,
Biechler's arrangement "reads on" the recitation of the tail
portion "extending from a first surface of the housing" as
broadly set forth in independent claim 1.
The appellants also contend that (1) the solder tails 88
(i.e., the end of each of the beam portions 82,94 - see, e.g.,
Fig. 2B) on the contact members 74,90 are described by Biechler
as being "stiff," which terminology "is typically used to
describe something that is not flexible or pliant" (brief, page
7) and (2) these solder tails are not meant to make contact
with the pads on the circuit or mother board (i.e, back plane)
by spring force. Such contentions are not persuasive.
As to contention (1), it is true Biechler in lines 20 and
21 of column 2 states that each of the contact members 74,90
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007