Appeal 2006-3320
Application 10/417,638
claims, i.e., claims 8, 20, 24 and 29. Claim 8 claims a washer assembly
comprising a washer, a body and “a cap that holds said washer to said body.”
Claim 20 claims a washer assembly comprising a washer, a body and “a cap that is
telescoped over the body.” Claim 24 claims a washer assembly comprising a
washer, a body and “a cap provided with a crimp to form a clamp.” Claim 29
claims a nut cap assembly comprising a body and “a cap telescoped over the body
and having a crimped portion that provides an annular clamp.”
Rejection over Goiny
Goiny discloses 1) a nut (40, 50) (which corresponds to the Appellant’s
body) having a circumferential flange (47, 57), 2) a pressure ring (42, 52) (which
corresponds to the Appellant’s washer) having a circumferential flange (49, 59),
and 3) a clamping ring (41, 51) in overlapping arrangement with the
circumferential flanges of the nut and pressure ring to interconnect the nut and the
pressure ring so they cannot be separated and lost (col. 4, ll. 28-62; figs. 4, 5).
The Examiner argues (Answer 4):
[T]he examiner agrees with appellant’s understanding of Goiny and that
Goiny’s specification does refer to elements 41 and 51 as “clamping rings”
but, this does not preclude the elements from being read as “a cap” in the
context of the claims. Indeed, the claims do not require any specific
structure or orientation of the “cap”. While appellant’s disclosure teaches
that the cap covers the entirety [of] the nut or bolt head this is simply not
claimed. Furthermore, appellant fails to explain why Goiny’s element 41 or
51 is not a cap. According to Webster’s a “cap” is “anything for capping”
thus according to the plain meaning, as provided by Webster’s, the
“clamping ring” is properly read as “a cap” since it is an element for capping
in that it caps the flange element (47 or 57) as shown in Goiny.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013