Appeal 2007-1548
Application 10/702,346
THE REJECTION
The Examiner relies upon the following as evidence of unpatentability:
Ito US 5,158,390 Oct. 27, 1992
Pepperling US 6,715,360 B1 Apr. 6, 2004
The Appellants seek our review of the rejection of claims 1-12 under
35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Pepperling and Ito.
ISSUE
The issue before us is whether the Appellants have shown that the Examiner
erred in determining that the subject matter of claims 1-12 would have been
obvious in view of the teachings of Pepperling and Ito. The issue focuses on
whether one having ordinary skill in the art would have had a reason to apply the
knurled, press-fit jointing structure of Ito to the pressure sensor assembly of
Pepperling.
FINDINGS OF FACT
We find that the following enumerated findings are supported by at least a
preponderance of the evidence. Ethicon, Inc. v. Quigg, 849 F.2d 1422, 1427, 7
USPQ2d 1152, 1156 (Fed. Cir. 1988) (explaining the general evidentiary standard
for proceedings before the Office).
1. Pepperling discloses a gauge pressure sensor assembly 72 including a
pressure port 74 (referred to as a housing) and a mounting boss 78 (referred
to as an attachment portion) (Pepperling, col. 3, ll. 59-65).
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013