Appeal No. 1998-2294 Page 5
Application No. 08/546,298
cap member, and (2) a biasing member having a first end that
is unitary with the base member and a second end that contacts
and is slidable along a surface of the base member when the
biasing member is compressed. However, these limitations are
not suggested by the applied prior art for the reasons set
forth by the appellants in their brief. In that regard, while
the prior art to Schulte, White, Edwards and Kelly may suggest
the interchangeability between a coiled spring electrical
contact and a leaf spring electrical contact, the prior art to
Schulte, White, Edwards and Kelly would not have taught or
suggested modifying the Admitted Prior Art in a manner to
arrive at the claimed invention. Specifically, it is our
opinion that the prior art to Schulte, White, Edwards and
Kelly would not have taught or suggested modifying the
Admitted Prior Art to include a contact means or contact
assembly having (1) a planar base member for attaching the
contact means to the cap member, and
(2) a biasing member having a first end that is unitary with
the base member and a second end that contacts and is slidable
along a surface of the base member when the biasing member is
compressed.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007