Appeal No. 1999-1165 Page 3
Application No. 08/753,174
No. 12) for the examiner's complete reasoning in support of the rejections, and to the Brief
(Paper No. 10) and Reply Brief (Paper No. 13) for the appellants’ arguments thereagainst.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given careful consideration to the
appellants’ specification and claims, the applied prior art references, the respective
positions articulated by the appellants and the examiner, and the guidance provided by our
reviewing court. As a consequence of our review, we make the determinations which
follow.
According to the appellants, it has been difficult with the prior art devices to achieve
proper sealing interengagement between the plastic pipes, sealing rings and slip nuts now
commonly used in plumbing drain installations, especially when it is necessary to work in
confined spaces. The appellants’ wrench includes as its objectives enabling rotation of a
plastic slip nut to achieve assembly or disassembly of a sealed joint in a drain line in such
a manner as to promote a good seal without distorting the circular contour of the nut or
otherwise damaging it, even when working under conditions of limited space, and
optimizing the degree of rotation which can be imparted to the slip nut without having to
reposition the wrench. See specification, pages 1-4).
As manifested in independent claim 1, the appellants’ invention comprises a
wrench having a C-shaped body portion of resilient polymeric material, spaced apart first
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007