Appeal No. 1999-2399
Application 08/705,798
The load beam plate spring portion 3-2' in figure 5,
consisting of the two longitudinal strips on either side of
the opening 3-2A, defines a "laterally extensive region of
perpendicular flexibility," like the laterally spaced
strips 48 and 50 in Appellants' figure 1. The load beam
support portion 3-1' having the upturned flanges along the
edges does not define a "laterally extensive region of
perpendicular flexibility" because the flanges are intended to
prevent perpendicular flexibility like the flanges 40 and 42
in Appellants' figure 1. Because the rib portions 3-1B and
3-2B are not within the region of perpendicular flexibility
they do constitute a brace, "said brace longitudinally
dividing said region of perpendicular flexibility," as
claimed. For a brace to longitudinally divide the region of
perpendicular flexibility, the load beam plate spring portion
3-2', it would have to extend across the opening 3-2A to
attach to the two strips. The Examiner erred in finding
anticipation. The anticipation rejection of claims 1, 2, 9,
and 11 is reversed.
Claims 12-14, 18, and 19
- 15 -
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007