Ex Parte Pollack - Page 2




          Appeal No. 2006-0462                                                        
          Application 09/587,948                                                      


               (b) at least one insulation piercing knife integral with               
          said crimp flange projecting from said bottom portion into the              
          space between said side portions; and                                       
               (c) a blade extending from said crimp flange for insertion             
          into an electrical socket, said blade including a web portion               
          connected to said crimp flange and a plurality of lance-formed              
          barbs along said web portion for abutting against a wall of the             
          pre-formed channel to resist removal of said electrical terminal            
          from said plug housing.                                                     
               The following references are relied on by the examiner:                
          Gilbert                  2,229,288                Jan. 21, 1941             
          Klumpp, Jr.              2,982,938                May   2, 1961             
          Takemasa                 6,045,408                Apr.  4, 2000             
          Ozaki                    09-213436                Aug. 15, 1997             
          (Japanese Patent)                                                           
               All claims on appeal stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103.             
          As to claims 1 through 3 and 21, the examiner relies upon Klumpp            
          in view of Takemasa.  As to claims 5 through 11, 13, 15, and 16,            
          the examiner relies upon Gilbert in view of Klumpp.  To this                
          latter combination of references, the examiner adds Takemasa as             
          to claims 12 and 17.  Finally, as to claims 18 through 20, the              
          examiner relies upon Gilbert in view of Klumpp, further in view             
          of Ozaki.                                                                   
               Rather than repeat the positions of the appellant and the              
          examiner, reference is made to the brief (no reply brief has been           
          filed) for the appellant’s positions, and to the answer for the             
          examiner’s positions.                                                       






                                          2                                           



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

Last modified: November 3, 2007