Ex parte SHIELDS E AL. - Page 4

          Appeal No. 2000-1625                                                        
          Application No. 08/942,618                                                  

          blind hole in shaft b.  As stated by the examiner on page 7 of              
          the answer:                                                                 
               [A]n annular recess is clearly shown in figures 2 and 3                
               [of Haines] between the unlabeled plug in the center of                
          the       knob shaft and the flange (e).  Applicant [sic:                   
          Applicants]    argues [sic: argue] that Haines does not                     
          disclose any        central protrusion or boss which would                  
          define an annular recess.  However, the Examiner has                        
          construed the unlabeled       plug to be a boss as part of the              
          mounting member defining      the annular recess, since the                 
          plug is also used for mounting     the knob.  Furthermore,                  
          claim 1 does not require the boss or    other central protrusion            
          defining the annular recess to be       integral with the                   
          mounting member prior to mounting the        knob.                          
               We do not consider this rejection to be well taken.  The               
          unlabeled part in the blind hole of the Haines knob is                      
          evidently a plug, separate from the mounting member f, which                
          is placed in the bore of the knob shaft prior to placing the                
          mounting member in the position shown in the drawings, in                   
          order to prevent lead from entering the interior of the knob                
          a.  The combination of this plug and the flange e on the                    
          mounting member does not, in our view, constitute an annular                
          recess as called for by claim 1, because claim 1 requires that              
          "said mounting member includes an annular recess to receive                 
          said free end of said shaft" (emphasis added).  The mounting                
          member cannot reasonably be said to include an annular recess               


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

Last modified: November 3, 2007