Appeal No. 2003-1828
Application No. 09/592,080
structure in order to obtain the advantages of a captive or
retained fastener as disclosed by Kuzdak. While Kuzdak may
address an additional problem, i.e., preventing the pointed end
portion of a fastener from protruding through the retaining
member (a problem which may or may not be of concern when
securing an air bag sensor module to a vehicle mounting
structure), that has no bearing on the fact that Kuzdak otherwise
provides the requisite motivation for using a captive fastener
arrangement to secure a base member to a support structure. The
motivation arises from the desire to reap the benefit of a
“captive” fastener which is taught by Kuzdak.
With regard to the limitation in claims 1 and 11 that the
diameter of the fastener shaft be less than the minor diameter of
the threaded portion of the fastener, we are of the opinion that
that particular limitation is fairly suggested by Kuzdak (col. 3,
l. 6-11) which indicates that, in the assembled position, the
unthreaded mid-portion (or shaft) of the fastener extends within
the threaded passage (or aperture) in the base member, but is
free of any threaded engagement therewith, as shown in Figure 4.
By implication, therefore, the shaft diameter should be less than
the minor diameter of the threaded aperture and less than the
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007