Appeal No. 2002-1471 Page 10
Application No. 09/141,183
for securing," and that the structure includes a combination of
slide captures (figures 3 and 4) on the rigid section of the load
beam to allow longitudinal displacement therethrough with
longitudinally inhibiting captures (figures 2 and 5-7) on the
resilient section of the load beam to prevent longitudinal
displacement therethrough. It is argued (brief, page 9) that
Hagen's capture tabs, which are sufficiently closed to prevent
the conductor sleeve 22 from sliding or moving longitudinally do
not meet the requirements of the claim.
The examiner's position (answer, page 5) is that the
structure disclosed in Hagen is equivalent to the structure
disclosed in the present application, and that appellants have
not provided sufficient proof that the structure of Hagen is not
equivalent structure. Appellants maintain (brief, page 10) that
the burden rests on the examiner to show that they are in fact
equivalent structures.
In order for the examiner to be able to ascertain whether
the disclosure of Hagen is the same as or equivalent to the
structure, material or acts disclosed in appellants'
specification, that correspond to the recited function, it is
necessary for the correponding structure to be defined. We find
that appellants' broad reference to the structures presented in
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007