Appeal No. 1998-2742
Application No. 08/751,068
Regarding the requirements in appellants’ claim 16 that
the movable second or stock rail section be pressed against
the first fixed tongue-shaped rail section over a
predetermined contact area, and that the first fixed rail
section have (in said predetermined contact area in which said
movable second rail section is pressed into contact) a
curvature corresponding to the bending line of said movable
second rail section, we find nothing in Weir which teaches or
suggests such a relationship. The movable tongue-shaped rails
(1) in Weir are said (page 1, lines 40-43) to abut against the
fixed rails (2) "inside of the angle [or bend] and at the
proper place to make a straight-line track." Thus, the area of
contact between the rail sections (1) and (2) in Weir, as may
be seen in Figures 1 and 4 of the patent, is over an area
where the portion (3) of rail (2) is straight and the abutting
face of the movable tongue-shaped rail (1) is likewise
straight. Contrary to the examiner’s view, there is simply
nothing in Weir which teaches or discloses a first fixed
tongue-shaped rail section having a curvature corresponding to
the bend line of a movable second stock rail section over the
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007