Interference No. 104,693 Preputnick v. Provencher 22. The placement of a conduction ground shield along one side of a terminal module to define a shielded terminal module was well known to one of ordinary skill in the art long before March 1995 and is explained repeatedly in the patent literature, as shown in the Soes 1183 patent and the Gilissen '341 patent. Based on the foregoing, we find that the placement of a conduction ground shield along one side of a terminal module to define a shielded terminal module was well known to one of ordinary skill in the art by March 1995. See, for example, U.S. Patent No. 5,496,183 (ęSoes") and U.S. Patent No. 5,104,341 ('Gilissen"), as is discussed in 1 22 of the Granitz declaration. We note further that in its Request for Declaration of Interference (Exhibit 2019, page 3), regarding a connector having a conduction ground shield along one side of the terminal module, Preputnick stated that '[s]uch ground shields are well known and admitted prior art and it would have been obvious to use such a shield with the terminal module of Count I." For the foregoing reasons, with regard to Provencher's claims 18 and 19, we gran Preputnick's preliminary motion 2 but only on the ground of obviousness over Hashiguchi in combination with the Kachlic patent (U.S. Patent No. 5,171,161), and dismiss Preputnick's preliminary motion 2 with respect to Provencher's .claims 18 and 19 on all other grounds of obviousness. 38Page: Previous 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007