Appeal 2006-1326
Application 09/919,326
order to satisfy these claim terms.1 We will use this interpretation in our
analysis below.
Hayashi discloses a rubber plug 3 that functions in the same manner
as Appellants’ high pressure sealing assembly 40. Namely, Hayashi’s
rubber plug 3 has an outer cylinder (16 or 16a) which deforms upon
insertion into sealing cylinder 1 (Hayashi, col. 4, ll. 30-40, 53-55; col. 5, ll.
3-13; Figure 1; Figure 2). Hayashi further discloses that outer cylinder 16
“. . . is kept pressed against the edge 1a of the opening being fully in close
contact with the latter” (Hayashi, col. 4, ll. 53-55). Moreover, with regard to
the Figure 2 embodiment, Hayashi discloses that the outer cylinder 16a “is
so formed that its outer cylindrical surface is suitably pressed against the
inner cylindrical surface of the seal cylinder 1” (Hayashi, col. 5, ll. 11-13).
Both of these disclosures indicate that a seal is formed between the sealing
surface of the outer cylinder 16 or 16a and the interior of the cavity.
From the foregoing, Hayashi discloses a sealing surface (i.e., the outer
surface of outer cylinder 16 or 16a) and a “skirt” (i.e., outer cylinder 16 or
16a) that satisfy Appellants’ claimed function of forming a seal with the
interior of the cavity by undergoing a “small amount” of deformation.
Therefore, Hayashi discloses Appellants’ only argued distinctions of a
sealing surface having “substantially the same shape as the interior of the
cavity prior to insertion” and a skirt that deforms a “small amount.”
1 If Appellants do not agree with our claim interpretation, then the Examiner
should consider making a 35 U.S.C. § 112, 2nd paragraph, rejection in any
further prosecution that may occur as Appellants have not provided any
guidance as to the meaning of these claim terms. Seattle Box Co., Inc. v.
Indus. Crating and Packing, Inc., 731 F.2d 818, 826,
221 USPQ 568, 573-74 (Fed. Cir. 1984).
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013