Appeal No. 1999-0055 Page 4
Application No. 08/703,545
seat members disposed in the chamber for supporting the plug, the seat
members comprising a rigid, solid support frame encapsulated in a
polymeric material.
It is the examiner’s view that all of the subject matter recited in this claim is disclosed or
taught by Freed, except for the fact that the seat members have a perforated frame instead
of the solid one required by the claim. However, it is the examiner’s position that because
Conley teaches that a valve body can be reinforced by either a solid frame or a perforated
one, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the Freed valve
seat members by replacing the perforated frame with a solid one, because “they will both
increase the strength of the body in which they are encapsulated” (Answer, page 4) and
“because one can directly observe the equivalence of the two structures and apply the
teaching to the analogous equivalence of a solid reinforcement to the perforated
reinforcement of Freed” (Answer, page 6).
Freed discloses a valve structure of the same general type as that which is recited
in claim 30. However, the seat members are provided with perforated support frames
(see Figure 5). These perforations have a purpose in addition to reinforcing the seat
members, and that is to allow integral portions of the resin material in which they are
encapsulated to flow through. The sections of the seat members overlying the imperforate
portions of the support frames thus are of a density greater than that of the sections
overlying the perforate portions, thereby providing a density differential. Under load
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007