Appeal No. 2006-2529
Application No. 10/428,792
second end is a stem 26 which extends into the barrel on the breech end. The
diameter of the stem is described in the following way:
The outer diameter of the free end portion 26 is substantially less than
the inner diameter of the nipple bore 54 so that the outer surface 28 of
the nipple is spaced from the inner surface 56 of the nipple bore to
form an annular auxiliary fire channel 72 extending from the side fire
channels 42 to the powder well 50. (Col. 3, lines 54-59).
Therefore, as readily can be seen, the stem of Laney is of uniform diameter and
forms a cavity between the diameter of the stem and the barrel. Lastly, Laney has
a bore that extends longitudinally through the entire breech plug.
ANALYSIS
Appellant argues that Laney fails to disclose a cavity formed between the
outer diameter of the stem and the inner diameter of the bore. We must emphasize
that Laney does disclose such a cavity. It might be argued that the cavity of Laney
is not between the stem and the barrel but between the stem and Laney’s breech
plug 68. However, the claim does not preclude the presence of another member
(the breech plug) between the barrel and the stem. Therefore, the cavity 72 is
physically located between the stem and the barrel.
In the reply, appellant argues that Laney fails to show a stem of uniform
diameter extending outwardly from the second end of the body as required by the
claim. Here again, we must note that the stem extends out of the body 22 with a
threaded portion 27 juxtaposed between the stem and the body. As noted above,
the claim, in “comprising” language, does not preclude the addition of the threaded
portion 27, inasmuch as Laney discloses a nipple, a body, and a stem. In other
words, the threaded portion 27 is not precluded by the claim language of claim 1.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013