Appeal No. 2000-1000
Application No. 08/392,062
flying off a rotating insert and causing injury would be
solved thereby.
Clearly, appellant’s disclosure can fairly be viewed as a
restricted or narrow disclosure. It offers a preferred
embodiment (Fig. 7) to solve the noted dam securement problem
that requires an undercut in each of the two sidewalls of the
conduit groove for engagement by locking screws located in
bores in a body member of a dam. Further, it suggests an
alternative arrangement for solving the problem (Fig. 8)
wherein an undercut in each of the two sidewalls of the
conduit groove is intended to be engaged by pins located in
bores in a body member of a dam. As we see it, one skilled in
the art would be informed by appellant’s disclosure that an
undercut in each of the two sidewalls of a conduit groove
cooperating with locking members in respective body member
bores is needed to insure that a dam is secured in place and
won’t fly away and cause injury. The provision of an undercut
in each sidewall of the conduit groove for interengagement
with locking members in respective body member bores is the
only possible solution offered by appellant in the
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007