Appeal No. 2002-0035
Application No. 08/861,918
of entering a new rejection against these claims, whereupon
appellants appealed from that rejection. Upon further review
(see page 2 of the answer), the examiner has withdrawn the
rejection of claims 28-30, 33-401 and 46. Thus, the appeal now
is directed only to claims 42-45.
Appellants’ invention pertains to a conductor (claims 42 and
44) for providing a lead-through connection to the interior of a
sealed housing, and the combination of a sealed housing and a
conductor (claims 43 and 45) providing a lead-through connection
to the housing’s interior. A copy of appealed claims 42-45 is
appended to appellants’ brief.
The single reference relied upon by the examiner in support
of the rejections maintained on appeal is:
Porter et al. (Porter) 4,805,420 Feb. 21, 1989
1In Paper No. 39, the examiner rejected claim 32 under
35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, as being indefinite in that it
depended from canceled claim 31, and suggested that claim 32 be
canceled. In the brief (Paper No. 42), appellants stated on page
8 that they agreed with this proposal; however, they did not
formally cancel claim 32. In light of appellants’ statement on
page 8 of the brief regarding their agreement with the examiner
that claim 32 should be canceled, the appeal as to claim 32 is
dismissed. A formal amendment canceling claim 32 should be
tendered upon return of this application to the Technology
Center.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007