Appeal 2006-2292
Application 10/439,565
• a link transmitting the movement of said wall portion to said
valve element, thereby moving said valve element with respect
to said valve seat responsive to inflation and deflation of said
cavity.
The Examiner relies on the following prior art references as evidence of
unpatentability:
Brown US 3,393,701 Jul. 23, 1968
Wang US 6,089,027 Jul. 18, 2000
Kder WO 00/67089 Nov. 9, 2000
The rejections as presented by the Examiner are as follows:
1. Claims 1, 2, and 5-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Wang in view of Brown.
2. Claims 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Wang in view of Kder.
Appellant argues claim 1 only. Accordingly, claims 2-10, which directly
or ultimately depend from claim 1, stand or fall with claim 1.
OPINION
35 U.S.C. § 103(a) REJECTIONS: WANG IN VIEW OF BROWN &
WANG IN VIEW OF KDER
Appellant argues that Wang teaches away from combining a standard
fluid cylinder having a cylinder inlet of less than 1 inch NGT with a fluid
pressure regulator because Wang discloses that the fluid storage and
dispensing vessel has an opening greater than 1 inch NGT (Br. 7). Appellant
further argues that Wang does not mention the possibility of making the
regulator smaller to fit into a smaller hole in the gas cylinder (Br. 9).
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013