Appeal 2007-2185
Application 10/614,992
35 U.S.C. § 102(b) REJECTION OVER KOAI
Appellants argue that, since Koai discloses that the three rings 220,
230, and 240 of the ring assembly 200 are bolted to the purge ring 280, there
is no mating engagement of the first edge ring and the second edge ring (Br.
14-15). Appellants further argue that Koai does not teach matching tapered
pins and tapered recesses (Br. 15).
We have considered all of Appellants’ arguments and find them
unpersuasive for the reasons below.
Koai discloses that the purge ring 280 (i.e., second edge ring) having
an outer portion 284 into which pins 272 are screwed (Koai, col. 6, ll. 17-
46). Koai further discloses that the edge ring assembly 200 rests upon the
pins 272 and is attached to the purge ring 280 (i.e., second edge ring) using
bolts 271 (Koai, col. 6, ll. 17-23).
We understand Appellants to be arguing that Koai fails to disclose
that the purge ring 280 (i.e., second edge ring) and edge ring assembly 200
mate when in the processing position (i.e., Appellants’ Figure 10) and
disengage when in the non-processing position (i.e., Appellants’ Figure 7).
However, this argument is directed to features that are not claimed. For
example, claim 3 only states that the second edge ring has one or more
matching tapered pins “for mating engagement” with one or more tapered
recesses of the first edge ring (claim 3). Plainly, claim 3 does not require
that the first and second edge ring mate during processing and disengage
during non-processing as argued. We shall not read such limitations into the
claims. Zletz, 893 F.2d at 321, 13 USPQ2d at 1322.
Rather, as the Examiner indicates (Answer 11) and as we note above,
Koai’s discloses that the edge ring assembly 200 is mated to the purge ring
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013