Appeal 2006-3125
Application 10/398,045
OPINION
We reverse the aforementioned rejection and remand the application
to the Examiner.
Field discloses “a unitary coupling assembly for use with refrigerant
lines” (col. 1, ll. 9-10). The coupling assembly includes 1) a metal unitary
female body (12) having at least two cylindrical passageways (14, 16), one
end of each being covered by a frangible metal diaphragm (26) and the other
end having a refrigerant line (32, 34) extending into it, and 2) metal mating
male coupling halves (52, 54), each having a leading end (56) covered by a
frangible metal diaphragm (62) and a trailing end (58) having a refrigerant
line (66, 68) extending into it (col. 2, ll. 44-47; col. 3, ll. 1-3, 21-23, 53-58).
The female body contains, between the diaphragm and the refrigerant line, a
metal cutting device (28) having a sharp edge (30) facing the diaphragms
(col. 2, ll. 59-61). The refrigerant lines are precharged with refrigerant
which the diaphragms prevent from escaping (col. 3, ll. 56-58). The female
body and male coupling portions are moved toward each other to obtain a
metal-to-metal seal therebetween by screwing a bolt (90) into a threaded
opening (42) (col. 4, ll. 1-3, 26-28; fig. 2). As the female body and male
coupling portions move toward each other during that coupling process the
sharp edges of the metal cutting devices rupture the diaphragms and thereby
allow flow of refrigerant through the refrigerant lines (col. 4, ll. 8-21; fig. 3).
The Examiner argues that Field’s metal cutting devices correspond to
the Appellant’s first and second connection elements, and that the
combinations of Field’s male coupling halves and their diaphragms
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013