Appeal No. 2000-1280
Application No. 09/110,785
(claims 10 to 20), and are reproduced in the appendix of
appellants' brief.1
The references applied in the final rejection are:
Boice 2,917,822 Dec. 22,
1959
Apblett, Jr. 4,175,779 Nov. 27,
1979
Claims 1 to 20 stand finally rejected as unpatentable
over Apblett in view of Boice, under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a).
The basis of the rejection, as explained by the examiner
on pages 4 and 5 of the answer, is:
Apblett, Jr. discloses the claimed device with first
tube 44, stress collar 48 fitted about the first
tube with the end of the first tube extending beyond
the collar and into a second tube or weldolet 46
which is secured via weld 52 to both the tube and
the collar. Apblett differs from the present[2]
invention in that inner diameter of collar 48 is
just slightly larger than the outer diameter of the
first tube 44 (see column 4, lines 45-50 and is
therefor not in an interference fit therewith.
1In reviewing the claims, it appears that in claims 3 and
12 appellants intended "first tube" (first occurrence) to be
--stress collar--. See page 6, lines 20 to 22 of the
specification.
2The joint disclosed by Apblett appears to be essentially
the same as that disclosed in appellants' Fig. 2, which is
described as being in accordance with the prior art, and
should be so labeled. MPEP § 608.02(g).
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007