Appeal No. 1999-0598
Application No. 08/866,064
“finished solder terminals not requiring further length change and which run alongside
and laterally project outwardly from opposite sidewalls of the housing and extending
vertically downward to a position level with a planar mounting surface (the edge portion at
38a) of the bottom of the housing and having unbent ends” [answer-page 3].
The examiner takes issue with the claimed term, “a width of the planar mounting
surface being greater than a thickness of the solder terminals,” taking the view that “a”
width can be any portion of the total width of the mounting surface and “a” thickness can be
any portion of the total thickness of the solder terminals. Therefore, concludes the
examiner, this limitation is “inherent” in Ishizaki.
The examiner dismisses the claimed limitation of the lead frame parts being
“punched parts” as a “process limitation” not further limiting the product. The examiner
also dismisses the failure of Ishizaki to teach solder terminals which “can be” soldered to
the printed circuit board at a top surface thereof because this is an “intended use” which
does not result in a structural difference between the claimed apparatus and the apparatus
of Ishizaki.
The examiner employs Stokes for a teaching of the functional and mechanical
equivalency of through hole terminals and joints, and butt terminals and joints and
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007