Ex Parte Duck et al - Page 2

                Appeal 2007-0720                                                                                
                Application 10/410,993                                                                          

                Appellants, the connector includes a plurality of modules, in the form of a                     
                sealed enclosure, in which switching relays or functional blocks input and                      
                transmit the signal.  Electronic components such as diodes, transistors, coils,                 
                resistors, capacitors, optical and optoelectronic components, integrated                        
                circuits, and combinations of the said elements form the functional blocks                      
                (Specification 2: 30 through 3: 2).                                                             
                       Independent Claim 4 reads as follows:                                                    
                       4.  A modular plug-in connector having buttable and replaceable                          
                       modules which are held in a retaining frame composed of two halves,                      
                       the modules being designed for a termination and transferring of                         
                       electrical, optical and/or pneumatic signals, wherein at least one                       
                       module is made as an enclosure which has a mating side and a                             
                       termination side for electrical, optical and/or pneumatic terminations,                  
                       and in that there is provided in the enclosure an integrated functional                  
                       block by which electronic, electrical, optical and/or pneumatic signals                  
                       may be varied and transferred.                                                           

                       The prior art relied upon by the Examiner in rejecting the claims on                     
                appeal is:                                                                                      
                       Harting    US 6,004,162  Dec. 21, 1999                                                   

                       The Examiner rejected claims 4-9 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being                       
                unpatentable over Harting.                                                                      
                       We reverse.                                                                              



                                                       2                                                        

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next

Last modified: September 9, 2013