Appeal No. 1999-0185 Page 4
Application No. 08/583,481
launcher and identified by the acronym “Speltra” in Figures 5
and 6 is not a nose cone given the dictionary definition of the
term “nose cone” as set forth supra and also on page 4 of
appellant’s main brief.
Accordingly, Johnson lacks a disclosure, express or
inherent, of a single piece nose cone as recited in claims 6
and 10. More specifically, Johnson lacks a disclosure, express
or inherent, of ejecting a nose cone as a single piece during a
propulsion thrust interruption as recited in claim 10. In
addition, Johnson lacks a disclosure, express or inherent, of
utilizing springs to eject the nose cone as recited in claim 6.
The springs mentioned in column 6, line 44, of Johnson’s
specification are for releasing the capsule, not the nose cone
housing the capsule. Accordingly, the Johnson patent is not a
proper anticipatory reference for the subject matter of claims
6 and 10 and hence for the claims that depend therefrom. See
Kloster Speedsteel AB v. Crucible Inc., 793 F.2d at 1571, 230
USPQ at 84.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007