Appeal 2007-0001
Application 09/944,589
In view of the foregoing, we will sustain this rejection as it is directed
to claim 1. We will also sustain the rejection as it is directed to claims 2-7
and 9-12 as the Appellant has not argued the separate patentability of these
claims.
We will also sustain the rejection as it is directed to claim 8 as we
have found that Alff discloses that the outer end of the cylindrical portion of
the second sealing plate 25 has a wall thickness smaller than the remaining
part of the cylindrical portion and is bent radially inward.
The decision of the Examiner is affirmed.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a). See 37 C.F.R.
§ 1.136(a)(1)(iv) (2006).
AFFIRMED
hh
STAAS & HALSEY, LLP
SUITE 700
1201 NEW YORK AVENUE, N.W.
WASHINGTON, DC 20005
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Last modified: September 9, 2013