Appeal No. 2002-1471 Page 12
Application No. 09/141,183
rejection of claim 19 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) is therefore
affirmed.
We turn next to the rejection of claims 14 and 15 under 35
U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Hagen. We reverse the
rejection of claims 14 and 15 because the examiner has not shown
that it would have been obvious to an artisan to have modified
Hagen to provide longitudinal sliding movement of the conductor
sleeve. Accordingly, the rejection of claims 14 and 15 under 35
U.S.C. § 103(a) is reversed.
CONCLUSION
To summarize, the decision of the examiner to reject claims
1, 2, 8, 9, 12, 13, and 16-18 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) is
reversed. The decision of the examiner to reject claims 14 and
15 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) is reversed. The decision of the
examiner to reject claim 19 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) is affirmed.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007