Appeal No. 2004-1302
Application No. 09/789,757
Admittedly, Cheung does not use the word “rigid” in
describing upstands 13. However, Cheung’s explanation of the
operation of the over-center mechanism makes clear that while
portions of the mechanism such as support arms 5 must flex
somewhat to allow the bridge portions 7, 8 to move between first
and second stable positions (compare Figures 4 and 6), operation
of the over-center mechanism does not require any movement
whatsoever on the part of upstands 13. Cheung’s specification
further makes clear that although the disk locating and securing
apparatus 1 as a whole is made of flexible material (column 5,
lines 36-38), this circumstance does not preclude individual
elements of the apparatus from being relatively rigid. See, for
example, column 5, lines 52-54, where support arms 5 are
described as and, in point of fact, required to be “suitably
rigid” in order for the over-mechanism to work as intended. In
addition, the shape of upstands 13 as illustrated in Cheung’s
drawing figures, as well as their stated function of supporting
and stabilizing the disk in the disk securing condition of the
bridge portions (see column 6, lines 37-41, and column 7, lines
34-38), dictate that the upstands should be stable and relatively
rigid. Based on the above, we conclude that Cheung’s upstands
13 are of such rigidity as compared to other portions of Cheung’s
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007