Appeal No. 1998-0509
Application 08/236,771
housing 4 are engaged with cutout slots 110A, 110B, 120A,
and 120B, presumably by the screw/grommet assemblies being
pushed into the cutout slots. Therefore, Remise does not
positively disclose that "the fastener fastens the housing
to a frame by turning," as recited in claims 1 and 12,
although the fastener is fastened to the housing by turning.
The Examiner's rejection does not address this difference.
For the reasons discussed above, we conclude that the
Examiner has failed to establish a prima facie case of
obviousness with respect to independent claims 1, 12,
and 28. The rejection of claims 1, 12, and 28, and
dependent claims 3-7, 14-21, 29, and 30 is reversed.
Worthing and Wollar, which are applied to various dependent
claims, do not cure the deficiencies of Remise and Dupree.
Thus, the rejections of claims 2, 8-11, 13, and 22-27 are
reversed.
CONCLUSION
The rejections of claims 1-30 are reversed.
REVERSED
- 9 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007