Appeal 2007-0631
Application 10/379,652
we reverse the rejection of claim 13 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being
anticipated by Hristake.
Claim 15:
Claim 15 depends from and further limits the device of claim 14 to
further comprise a means operative upon the reapplying of the external
insertion force for releasing the maintained positive force. As set forth
above with respect to claims 8 and 13, the Examiner has failed to identify
any section in Hristake, and we find none, that expressly or inherently
teaches the reapplication of a force in the direction of the insertion force to
an outer edge of the device to release the maintained engaged position.
Accordingly, we reverse the rejection of claim 15 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b)
as being anticipated by Hristake.
Claim 18:
Claim 18 is drawn to a printed wiring board (PWB) adapted for
latching into a mated relationship with a housing mounted connector. The
PWB comprises:
1. a protrusion for releasably accepting a latching mechanism,
2. the latching mechanism operates, in conjunction with the
protrusion, and with an outer portion of the housing, for maintaining positive
force between the PWB and the connector to maintain positive electrical
contact between the PWB and the connector after externally applied
insertion force has been removed.
As the Examiner points out, Hristake teaches a printed circuit board
(40) adapted for latching into a mated relationship with a housing (42)
14
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013