Appeal No. 2000-0398
Application 08/903,406
Figures 6, 7A and 7B, the examiner incorrectly corresponds the
claimed feature of first and second guide tabs to paired element 79
and its corresponding slots to paired element 69. The examiner’s
perspective as stated in this portion of the rejection of the claims
on appeal begins with the correlation of Morris’s rating plug cover
21 to the claimed plate or programmer cover. Despite the examiner’s
views, there are no corresponding guide tabs which include detents
associated with the cover 21 in the Figures 6, 7A and 7B showings of
Morris’s invention. Corresponding elements 79 and 69 in the Figures
do not correspond to these structural elements and functions. It is
the attachment tabs 81 being fed through the attachment slots 80
which affix to capture and thereby retain in the sense at the end of
claim 1 on appeal the rectangular plate cover 21 to the rating plug
case 20 best shown in Figure 6.
On the other hand, we do sustain the rejection of independent
claim 1 for the modified reasons by the examiner expressed in the
middle of page 5 of the answer where the examiner takes the view
that the rating plug assembly itself as a whole, which is element 17
as best depicted in Figure 6 with side views shown in Figures 7A and
7B, which acts in its entirety as a cover corresponding to the
claimed programmer cover and its plate of claim 1 on appeal. From
this perspective then, the examiner’s reliance upon the side case
projections 69 of case 20 do project through the access hole 23,
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007