Appeal No. 1999-2790
Application No. 08/794,530
arguing (brief, pages 4-6) that Wall does not disclose, teach
or suggest the "shaped profile means" as claimed by appellant
in independent claim 1 and the claims which depend therefrom,
or the steps of "positively causing," "positively preventing
reengagement," and
"positively releasing" as set forth in the method claims on
appeal. In response, the examiner has urged (answer, pages 3-
5) that it is the curved, rounded, blunt shape of the extreme
end (at 29) of Wall in combination with the bias of the first
and second arms therein which cause the first longitudinal
edge (at 30) to pass over the top of the second longitudinal
edge (at 29). The examiner has further explained the details
of his position in the paragraph bridging pages 4 and 5 of the
answer.
Appellant asserts (brief, pages 5-6) that the examiner
has engaged in mere speculation in stating that the rounded
ends of the arms seen in Wall Figure 4 have anything to do
with the reversal of the radial positions of the arms therein.
More particularly, appellant has pointed out that Wall does
not teach or suggest that the ends (29, 30) of the opposing
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007