Ex parte RODRIGUES et al. - Page 6




                     Appeal No. 98-3293                                                                                                                                                
                     Application 08/650,417                                                                                                                                            


                     this is because appellants’ claim 1 on appeal does not define over the open, tubular spacer of                                                                    

                     McSherry by defining a bottom wall (e.g., 33) for the spacer and a cable support surface (35) thereof,                                                            

                     as seen in Figures 1 and 2 of the application, that extends continuously from one end wall (26) of the                                                            

                     spacer body to the opposite end wall of the spacer body, thereby providing a cable support surface                                                                

                     which is clearly capable of supporting a cable continuously along the entire length of the spacer body.                                                           

                     While we understand that such an arrangement is structurally what appellants have disclosed in their                                                              

                     specification, we must agree with the examiner that the language employed in claim 1 on appeal is                                                                 

                     subject to a much broader interpretation and is not limited to an arrangement like that disclosed in the                                                          

                     specification and shown in the drawings of appellants’ application.2                                                                                              



                                For the above reasons, we will sustain the examiner’s rejection of claim 1 on appeal under 35                                                          

                     U.S.C. § 102(b) based on McSherry.                                                                                                                                


                                2With regard to a spacer which is apparently similar to that seen in McSherry, but which has a                                                         
                     closed bottom wall for contacting a supported cable member, we direct the examiner’s attention to the                                                             
                     prior art mentioned on page 2, lines 13-19, and page 7, lines 21-23, of appellants’ specification.  In                                                            
                     addition, in the event of any further prosecution, the examiner should also consider the applicability of                                                         
                     the spacer seen in Murphy (e.g., Figs. 9 and 10) to the claimed subject matter.  Further, the examiner                                                            
                     should evaluate the scope to be afforded the "or the like" language found in lines 1 and 9 of appellants'                                                         
                     claim 1 and similar recitations in claim 10.  For purposes of this appeal, we understand this language in                                                         
                     line 1 of claim 1 to encompass "wire, conduit, or other similar transmission means", as has been set                                                              
                     forth on page 3 of appellants' specification.  As for the recitation in line 9 of claim 1, we understand                                                          
                     such language to additionally cover a "strap" as set forth on page 8 of the specification.                                                                        

                                                                                          6                                                                                            





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007