Ex Parte Belanger et al - Page 3




          Appeal No. 2004-0706                                                        
          Application No. 09/777,982                                                  


                                  THE REJECTIONS                                      
               Claims 1 through 4, 10, 13, 14, 19, 21, 22 and 35 stand                
          rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by                   
          McClure.                                                                    
               Claims 5 through 9, 11, 12 and 15 through 18 stand rejected            
          under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over McClure.                
               Claims 20 and 23 through 32 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.             
          § 103(a) as being unpatentable over McClure in view of Wafer.               
               Attention is directed to the brief (Paper No. 18) and answer           
          (Paper No. 19) for the respective positions of the appellants and           
          examiner regarding the merits of these rejections.2                         
                                     DISCUSSION                                       
               McClure discloses an electrical connector assembly for use             
          with a printed circuit board 12 having contacts 14 in the form of           
          solder pads or plated through holes.  The connector assembly                
          includes a first connector 10 comprising a housing 20 and a                 
          plurality of terminals 22, and a second connector 16 comprising a           
          plurality of leads 18.  The terminals 22 have opposite ends for             


               2 In the final rejection (Paper No. 8), claim 35 also stood            
          rejected, along with claims 34 and 36, under 35 U.S.C. § 112,               
          second paragraph, as being indefinite.  The examiner withdrew               
          this rejection in view of the subsequent amendment of these                 
          claims (see the advisory action dated December 20, 2002, Paper              
          No. 10).                                                                    
                                          3                                           




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007