Appeal 2007-0020
Application 10/680,510
over JP ‘093 in view of Du Pree or JP ‘432, further in view of Collette or the
Appellants’ admitted prior art.1
OPINION
We reverse the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, affirm
the rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103 involving JP ‘432, and affirm the other
rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as to some of the claims and reverse as to the
other claims.
Rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph
The Examiner argues that an odd number of flange straight surfaces and
apexes cannot be symmetrically oriented, and that it is not clear about what line the
straight surfaces and apexes are symmetrical (Answer 4, 7-8).
“Symmetrical” means “having, involving, or exhibiting symmetry”, where
“symmetry” means “the property of being symmetrical; esp: correspondence in
size, shape, and relative position of parts on opposite sides of a dividing line or
median plane or about a center or axis”.2 As shown in the Appellants’ figures 6A,
6B, 8A and 8B, the Appellants’ flange having an odd number of straight surfaces
and apexes has an apex that is opposite to a straight surface. If a line is drawn
through that apex perpendicular to the opposite straight surface, the halves of the
opposite straight surface, the other straight surfaces, and the other apexes
corresponds in size, shape and relative position about the line. Due to that
correspondence, the straight surfaces and the apexes reasonably can be considered
“symmetrically oriented” as that term is used by the Appellants. Thus, the
1 Numerous other rejections are withdrawn in the Examiner’s Answer (Answer 3).
2 Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary 1181 (G. & C. Merriam 1973).
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013