Appeal No. 2005-0005
Application No. 10/156,568
The examiner maintains that the housing 2 of Hansell corresponds to the
insulator plate of the claimed invention and that the signal contacts correspond to the
signal contacts 12. (See answer at page 3.) We cannot agree with the examiner
because the claimed invention recites that the signal contacts are formed on the
insulator plate and that the engagement with the terminals does not alter the
predetermined distance between the terminals. Hansell states in column 3, lines 46-
47, that Fig. 1 also shows ”a plurality of signal contacts 12 positioned within the
housing cavities 5" [emphasis added] where the cavities 5 are within the housing 2.
Therefore, we cannot agree with the examiner that the contacts are formed on the
insulator plate. Therefore, we find that the examiner has not established a prima facie
case of anticipation, and we cannot sustain the rejection of independent claim 1 and its
dependent claims 2 and 3 nor independent claim 4.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007