Appeal No. 2003-2098 Page 19
Application No. 09/833,978
The appellant argues that the limitation of claim 8 that the rocker switch includes
a pair of flat and intersecting surfaces about an upper portion of the rocker switch is not
met by Lockard's knob is unpersuasive since as clearly shown in Figures 3 and 4 of
Lockard, knob 30 has a pair of flat and intersecting surfaces about an upper portion of
the knob.
The appellant argues that the limitation of claim 9 that a lower portion of the
rocker switch comprises a cam-shaped arcuate body is not met by Lockard is
unpersuasive since as clearly shown in Figures 3 and 4 of Lockard, the lower portion of
the rocker switch include contact portions 22a, 22b and 24 which are cam-shaped
arcuate bodies.
Claim 10 read as follows:
The electrical interrupt switch of Claim 9, wherein said conductive
contacts comprise:
a first electrically conductive contact supported along a first side of said
body;
a second electrically conductive contact having a first end opposite a
second end, said first end in electrical communication with [one of] said
receptacle connectors and said second end projects downward from a horizontal
portion of said second electrically conductive contact and away from said cam-
shaped arcuate body such that as said rocker switch is articulated, said first
electrical conductive contact engages said blade connectors at one end and
engages said second electrical conductive contact at an opposite end;
a third electrically conductive contact having a first end opposite a second
end, said first end in electrical communication with [another] one of said
receptacle connectors and said second end projects downward from a horizontal
Page: Previous 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007