Appeal No. 2001-1799
Application 09/097,655
Gentry, Champion and Taylor as each teaching what the examiner
refers to as telescoping engagement and coding means between the
housings of two mating connectors. The examiner states that it
would have been obvious to the artisan to connect the electrical
connectors of either of the primary references in the manner
taught by any of the secondary references to facilitate mating
therebetween [answer, pages 3-4].
Appellants argue that the examiner has failed to find a
teaching of the two guiding means as recited in claim 1.
Specifically, appellants admit that Bhagwat and Liston each
teaches a coarse centering of the battery pack in relation to the
appliance housing. Appellants also admit that each of Gentry,
Champion and Taylor teaches a fine centering guidance between
clip-like contacts and prong-like contacts when they engage each
other. Appellants argue, however, that none of the prior art
references applied by the examiner teach using both a first and
second guiding means together. Appellants assert that the only
motivation to combine the teachings of the references in the
manner proposed by the examiner comes from appellants’ own
disclosure. Appellants argue that neither primary reference
teaches a need for a second guiding means and neither secondary
reference teaches its use in combination with an electric
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007