Interference No. 104,693
Preputnick v. Provencher
necessarily shown in Hashiguchi. However, Mr. Granitz's opinion
is evidently based on the mistaken assumption that the fastening
portions on the first and second half-modules need not directly
engage each other. Note Paragraph No. 54 of Mr. Granitz's
declaration which is reproduced below:
54. It is my opinion that the Hashiguchi 6-88065
application inherently discloses to one of ordinary
skill in the art the step of 'securing the first and
second half-modules together by engaging complementary
fastening portions" required.by Provencher claim 17.
As seen in figures 1-3, 5(a) and 6(a), it discloses*
that first and second half-modules 1, 2 comprise forked
pieces 15 and 2S, which engage protruding part 41 of
connector housing 4 (Preputnick Exhibit Nos. 2009 and
2010, Hashiguchi 6-88065, p.8, para. 14, 11. 1-10; p.9,
para. 20, 11. 1-5). An ordinary skilled artisan would
recognize that the forked pieces 15, 25 are
complementary in that they align with one another when
the half-modules 1 and 2 are paired together to thereby
form a channel that is engaged by protruding portions
41 of housing 4 to define terminal modules.
It is not enough that each half-module contains a fastening
portion which engages the same member 41 on a housing 4. The
fastening portions of Hashiguchi do not directly engage each
other and do not have a structure dependent on that of each
other. Rather, they engage an element on the housing and have a
structure complementary to that of the element on the housing.
Mr. Grant, the technical expert of Provencher also recognizes
that Hashiguchi teaches securing each of modules 1 and 2 to the
housing but not directly to each other. (Exhibit 1015, Iff 14).
22
Page: Previous 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007