Appeal 2007-1252
Application 10/915,714
the connector, and abut the coupler housing. Bernardi teaches that the item that
receives the connector, plug body (item 20), is threaded inside of the link part
(item 28). Thus, any sealing member between plug body and link part (items 20
and 28) would be in or abutting the plug body (claimed coupler member), and not
on the coupler member as claimed. Katwala does not teach a sealing member that
could be added to a device similar to that of Bernardi such that the sealing member
would be “on” the coupler member and “abut” the coupler housing as claimed in
independent claim 1. Accordingly, we will not sustain the Examiner’s rejection of
claims 1 through 3 and 13 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 (a) as being unpatentable over
Bernardi in view of Katwala.
The Examiner has rejected claims 5 and 14 through 18 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as being unpatentable over Bernardi in view of Katwala and Below.
Claims 5 and 14 through 18 all ultimately depend upon independent claim 1. As
discussed supra, we do not find that the combination of Bernardi and Katwala
teaches or suggests the elements recited in claim 1. The Examiner states on page 4
of the Answer that Below teaches a sealing member item 86. Below describes item
86 as a latching mechanism. (See col. 5, ll. 39-59.) While Below does teach
several sealing members (see e.g. item 61 in figures 4B, 7, 9, and 10C; item 110
described in col. 6, ll. 22-49; and item 154, of figure 28, described in col. 8, ll.
3-19), we do not find that Below teaches or suggests the sealing member “on” the
coupler member and “abutting” the coupler housing as claimed in independent
claim 1. Thus, we do not sustain the Examiner’s rejection of claims 5 and 14
through 18 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Bernardi in view
of Katwala and Below.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013