Appeal No. 2003-2081
Application No. 09/893,931
we find that the locks of Hoppe, Jr. and the locks of McKee would provide some degree
of restraint/pressure against longitudinal forces.
Appellants argue that the combination of Hoppe, Jr. and Endo would require the
skilled artisan to “go precisely against the teachings of both references.” (See brief at
page 9.) We do not find that the combination as advanced by the examiner would
require the skilled artisan to go precisely against the teachings of both references.
Appellants argue that none of the references discloses or suggests the various
limitations with respect to the structure of the locks. (See brief at pages 9-10.) As
discussed below, we find that Endo teaches substantially planar locks which are
substantially perpendicular to the side walls and these locks having “edges,” side
edges, or “edge faces” which define portions of the locks furthest from the side walls
which contacts the wire.
Appellants argue that none of the references disclose or suggest the various
limitations with respect to the structure of the locks in combination with the V-shaped
insulation-displacement portions. (See brief at page 10.) The examiner maintains that
McKee discloses and suggests that both V-shaped insulation-displacement portions
and locks may both be implemented in the structure of a connector. We agree with the
examiner.
Appellants argue that the examiner has based the rejection upon improper
hindsight and that the examiner has picked and chosen elements in the references.
9
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007