Ex Parte Walter et al - Page 3




               Appeal No. 2006-1621                                                                                                 
               Application No. 10/107,672                                                                                           

               cup-shaped element, that the insert 5, the cover 6, and the connector 7 function as a retaining part                 
               for the electronic system (i.e., IC 3), that the opening 8 at the end of the sensor housing receives                 
               a sealant from dispenser 10, and that the retaining part and the sealant cover the opening at the                    
               top of the cup 2.  Appellants’ argument (brief, page 8) to the contrary notwithstanding, the noted                   
               elements 5, 6 and 7 in Gagliardi function to retain the electronic system 3.  With respect to                        
               appellants’ argument (brief, pages 7 and 8) that the opening 8 in Gagliardi is not a lateral                         
               opening because it is not located on a longer side of the sensor, we agree with the examiner’s                       
               positions (answer, pages 5, 6, 8 through 11, 13 and 14) that the disclosed and claimed invention                     
               does not support such an interpretation of lateral opening, and that a lateral opening can be                        
               located in an end of the sensor.  Thus, the anticipation rejection of claim 1 based upon the                         
               teachings of Gagliardi is sustained.  The anticipation rejection of claims 2, 5, 6, 8 and 18 based                   
               upon the teachings of Gagliardi is sustained because appellants have not presented any                               
               patentability arguments for these claims.                                                                            
                       Turning to the anticipation rejection of claim 1 based upon the teachings of Lock, we                        
               agree with the examiner’s findings (answer, page 3 and 4) that bolt shaft 12 functions as a cup-                     
               shaped part, that the end 18 functions as a retaining part for the electronic system 30, that an                     
               opening at the end of the sensor receives a sealant that embeds the electronic system in the cup-                    
               shaped part (column 3, lines 5 through 7, column 4, lines 4 through 7), and that the retaining part                  
               covers an opening in the cup-shaped part.  Appellants repeat the lateral opening argument to                         
               distinguish Lock’s teachings from the invention set forth in claim 1 (brief, pages 7 and 8), but we                  
               agree with the examiner’s position that the lateral opening can be in the end of the sensor.                         

                                                                 3                                                                  




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007