Appeal No. 2002-1860
Application No. 09/204,275
Gore and Associates, Inc. v. Garlock, Inc., 721 F.2d 1540, 1554,
220 USPQ 303, 313 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 851
(1984).
With respect to independent claims 6, 33, 48, and 51, the
Examiner attempts to read the various limitations on the disclosure
of Fujiura. In particular, the Examiner directs attention to the
illustrations in Figures 2 and 5-8 of Fujiura along with the
accompanying description beginning at column 1, line 52.
Appellants’ arguments in response, initially directed to the
limitations in independent claim 6, assert a failure of Fujiura to
disclose every limitation in claim 6 as is required to support a
rejection based on anticipation. In particular, Appellants assert
(Brief, pages 13-15; Reply Brief, pages 3 and 4) that, at the very
least, Fujiura lacks a disclosure of a sensor lever having a
tension part which provides a predetermined degree of tension to
the sensor lever to position the sensor lever toward the open
position of the sensor hole when the cover is opened, all as set
forth in appealed claim 6.
After reviewing the Fujiura reference in light of the
arguments of record, we are in general agreement with Appellants’
position as expressed in the Briefs. At the outset, we find no
basis for the Examiner’s position that the supporting pieces 27 in
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007