Appeal No. 2006-1546
Application No. 09/974,262
of both the horizontal breakage part (i.e., tear line) 16a and
the breakage part (i.e., tear line) 16b. Ribs (i.e., ridges) 26
are used to reinforce horizontal breakage part (i.e., tear line)
16a and ribs (i.e., ridges) 30 are used to reinforce breakage
part (i.e., tear line) 16b. (Otsuka, Figure 1). As such,
Otsuka’s use of the term “breakage part” to describe the portion
of the cover composed of both the horizontal breakage part 16a
and breakage part 16b and his addition of ribs (i.e., ridges)
thereto in order to solve the rigidity problem in the airbag
cover, demonstrates that Otsuka’s “one or more” rib (i.e.,
ridge) disclosure reasonably relates to all breakage part(s)
(i.e., tear lines(s)) and therefore includes all sets of ribs
(e.g., 26 and 30). From this Otsuka teaching, the minimum
number of ribs (i.e., ridges) “astride” the breakage parts
(i.e., tear lines) on the cover may be one.
As to Appellants’ argument that claims 19 and 20 should be
construed such that “only one or two independent ridges” be
present on the airbag cover, we cannot agree. (Brief, page 6).
Claims 19 and 20 require “only one or two independent ridges” be
integrally formed on the inner surface of the cover member
“astride said at least one the tear lines.” The claim language
may be construed, as Appellants’ contend, to mean that only one
19
Page: Previous 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007