Appeal No. 99-0637 Page 6
Application No. 08/711,841
The two flat forward surfaces of the ferrules 24 and
24' thus abut one another and are forced into tight
sealing relationship with one another by the
tightening fasteners 26 and 26', respectively. This
tightening also causes the rearward end of the
ferrule 24 to be formed radially inwardly to
sealingly engage around the tubing 12 and the
rearward end of the ferrule 24' to be formed
inwardly into sealing engagement with the tube 12'
by the action of the conical wall surfaces 46 and
46' on the forward ends of the fasteners 26 and 26',
respectively, all as described in connection with
the previous embodiment.
In our opinion, the element-by-element analysis of the
examiner on pages 3 and 4 of the answer, which is reproduced
above, is fully responsive to the appellants' broad argument
that "it appears that the Examiner is treating method Claims
1-8 as apparatus Claim 12 and has failed to specifically point
out where in each of the references is taught the sequence of
operational steps recited in Claims 1-8" (brief, page 7). We
find support for the steps outlined by the examiner in column
4, line 48 through column 5, line 9, of Anderson.
Regarding appellants' argument that the throughbore
shoulder prevents the tubing from extending through the
opening in the ferrule so as to be "adjacent the face of the
ferrule" as recited in claim 3 (brief, page 7), we acknowledge
that the shoulder, discussed in column 3, lines 25 through 38,
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007