Appeal No. 2006-1149
Application No. 10/296,406
provides such a sealing function [Zinn, col. 4, line 24, Fig. 2].
There must be some teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art (or in the
knowledge of those of ordinary skill) to combine the references in the manner suggested. In
re Rouffet, 149 F.2d 1350, 1357-59, 47 USPQ2d 1453, 1456 (Fed. Cir. 1998). We agree that
the examiner has provided a proper motivation in stating that it would have been obvious to a
person of ordinary skill in the art “to form the adapter of Muzslay with a second seal being
positioned between the second end of the adapter and counterplug, as taught by Zinn, to
provide a liquid-tight connection” [answer, page 4]. One of the main objects of Zinn’s
invention is to provide “secure protection against moisture” [Zinn, col. 1, lines 40, 45, 52].
Accordingly, we will sustain the examiner’s rejection of claims 10-17, 19, and 20 for
the reasons argued by the examiner.
Claim 18
Dependent claim 18 requires that elastic spring shackles are pluggable into contact
tabs of the counterplug. As shown in Fig. 2, elastic spring shackles 12 provide a female
receptacle for making an electrical connection with a corresponding male connector shown
as contact tab 10.
The instant specification describes this coupling between the elastic spring shackles
and the contact tabs at page 5, line 4:
In the preferred exemplary embodiment illustrated in Figure 1, elastic spring
shackles 12, into which contact tabs 14 of plug-in connector 4 are inserted, are
implemented on contact tabs 10 of adapter 1 facing plug-in connector 4, while
on the opposite side, elastic spring shackles 12 are implemented on contact
tabs 13 of counterplug 6 facing contact tabs 10 of adapter 1, so that contact
-10-
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007