Appeal No. 2004-1317
Application No. 10/143,377
The only difference is that allowed independent claims
1 and 8 require permanently securing two webs of
insulator material to multiple spring units with
securing elements, whereas rejected independent claims
12, 23 and 25 require permanently securing only one web
of insulator material to multiple spring units with
securing elements. This difference between the appli-
cation of one web of insulator material versus two webs
of insulator material is not enough of a distinction to
justify the rejection of independent claims 12, 23 and
25 [page 7 of Brief, second paragraph].
Manifestly, since we disagree with appellants with respect
to the examiner's rejection of claims 12, 23 and 25 for the
reasons set forth above, and appellants concede that there is not
a significant distinction between securing two webs of insulator
material and one web of insulator material, it follows that we
find that the subject matter of claims 1-11 and 16-22 would have
been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art over the
collective teachings of Kelly and Wunderlich.
In conclusion, based on the foregoing, the examiner's
rejection of claims 12-15 and 23-25 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is
affirmed. A new ground of rejection under the provisions of
37 CFR § 1.196(b) of allowed claims 1-11 and 16-22 under
35 U.S.C. § 103(a) has been entered.
In addition to affirming the examiner's rejection of one or
more claims, this decision contains a new ground of rejection
pursuant to 37 CFR § 1.196(b). 37 CFR § 1.196(b) provides, "[a]
-7-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007