Ex parte MUZSLAY - Page 4

          Appeal No. 1998-3027                                                        
          Application No. 08/546,179                                                  

               While Ostapovitch’s contact structure is shaped like a                 
          “box” and Wurster’s device is shaped partly cylindrical and                 
          partly cone-shaped, it is clear to us that the cylindrical                  
          portion of Wurster and the elongated box-shape of Ostapovitch               
          would have suggested employing a cylindrical shape to the                   
          hooded socket of Ostapovitch and appellant does not argue the               
          cylindrical shape of the hood as a patentable distinction.                  

               With regard to the claim limitation of the tabs “forming               
          at least three radially innermost locations circumferentially               
          spaced apart” by about 120 degrees about a central axis in                  
          claim 1 and similar language in claim 9, the examiner points                
          out, at page 3 of Paper No. 11, that Wurster shows this                     
          generally claimed structure and that it would have been                     
          obvious to provide Ostapovitch with Wurster’s teachings of                  
          having the fingers and tabs spaced 120 degrees apart in order               
          to “provide better surrounding and centering forces to a pin                
          located in the socket.”  We find nothing in appellant’s                     
          arguments which would show error in the examiner’s position.                


Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007