Appeal No. 2004-1252
Application No. 09/705,710
Claims 49, 50 and 57 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
as being unpatentable over Ragard in view of in view of Kirsch
and Holcomb.
Attention is directed to the main and reply briefs (Paper
Nos. 14 and 16) and to the answer (Paper No. 15) for the
respective positions of the appellants and the examiner regarding
the merits of these rejections.
DISCUSSION
Ragard, the examiner’s primary reference, discloses “[a]n
apparatus for severing electronic components from a film stip
upon which they are mounted; for bending the leads of the
component; and for inserting the components into a circuit board”
(Abstract). More specifically, the reference teaches that
[t]he apparatus of the present invention is
adapted in sequence to feed insertion film 2; sever
leads 5a, 5b, 5c and 5d of successively present
components 4 in order to separate a presented component
from film 2a and 2b; deform the free end portions of
the severed leads to provide generally L-shaped leads;
and insert the deformed leads into preformed apertures
6a, 6b, 6c and 6d provided in a circuit board,
designated at 6. After insertion of the deformed
leads, the free ends thereof, which project below
circuit board 6, may be clinched to retain them in
inserted position by any suitable clinching mechanism
7, which includes clinching devices 7a and 7b, as
indicated in phantom in FIG. 9d.
Circuit board 6 may be adjustably positioned below
the insertion apparatus by any conventional supporting
apparatus, not shown, which is adapted to be driven in
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007