Appeal No. 2000-0533
Application No. 08/821,508
required by the claims, and will not produce a bead (brim) of
the type disclosed by Takikawa.
The examiner concedes that McIntosh and Currie do not
teach or suggest a flaring/extruding process which would
simultaneously produce parallel conical surfaces and an
annular bead as required by the claims. However, the
examiner's position, in essence, is that any deficiencies in
the flaring/extrusion taught by Currie are overcome by the
teachings of Takikawa (answer, page 3).
While Takikawa teaches that flared double-wall conduits
having parallel exterior and interior conical surfaces and an
annular bead of the type formed by the claimed method were
known in the art at the time of appellants' invention, we
perceive no teaching or suggestion in the applied references
to form that particular flared end by axially pressing a tool
into the conduit to form the parallel exterior and interior
conical surfaces and simultaneously extruding the annular bead
by the axial pressing of the tool. As discussed above,
Takikawa does not specify the method of forming the flared end
and, thus, provides no suggestion of such a method. McIntosh
and Currie, on the other hand, fail to teach or suggest a
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007