Ex Parte Fuks et al

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

Jan 23, 2004

09604141 (B.P.A.I. Jan. 23, 2004)

The opinion in support of the decision being entered today was not written
for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.
Paper No. 29
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________
Ex parte RUDOLF FUKS, STEPHEN J. TOMA,
GEORGE GEORGHIOU and DONALD P. DURETT
____________
Appeal No. 2003-1704
Application No. 09/604,141
____________
HEARD: January 8, 2004
____________
Before HAIRSTON, RUGGIERO, and DIXON, Administrative Patent Judges.
HAIRSTON, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is an appeal from the final rejection of claims 1 through
16, 18 through 23 and 25 through 29.
The disclosed invention relates to a microwave connector
assembly for connection to an electrical device. The microwave
connector assembly uses a high flexural strength rigid epoxy resin
to bond a terminating flexible microwave coaxial cable to an
annular locking member.
Appeal No. 2003-1704
Application No. 09/604,141
2
Claim 29 is illustrative of the claimed invention, and it
reads as follows:
29. A microwave connector assembly for connection to an
electrical device, comprising:
a terminating flexible microwave coaxial cable including an
inner conductor, an intermediate dielectric, an outer flexible
braided conductor, and an outer insulator adapted to conduct
microwave signals of at least 30 GHz;
a coupling nut adapted to connect said microwave flexible
cable to the device; and
an annular locking member having an inside surface sized to
receive said outer insulator of said coaxial cable therein and
bonded by means of a bonding agent to said outer insulator thereof,
said annular locking member being coupled to said coupling nut;
wherein said bonding agent is a high flexural strength rigid
epoxy resin that eliminates movement between said coaxial cable and
said annular locking element and provides antirotational
captivation during mating and demating cycles.
The references relied on by the examiner are:
DeHaan et al. (DeHaan) 4,743,327 May 10, 1988
Toma 5,607,325 Mar. 4, 1997
Shimirak et al. (Shimirak) 5,945,634 Aug. 31, 1999
Claims 1 through 12, 14, 16, 18 through 21, 23 and 27 through
29 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable
over Toma in view of Shimirak.
Claims 13, 15, 22, 25 and 26 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as being unpatentable over Toma in view of Shimirak and
DeHaan.
Appeal No. 2003-1704
Application No. 09/604,141
3
Reference is made to the briefs (paper numbers 20 and 23) and
the answer (paper number 21) for the respective positions of the
appellants and the examiner.
OPINION
We have carefully considered the entire record before us, and
we will reverse the obviousness rejection of claims 1 through 16,
18 through 23 and 25 through 29.
All of the claims on appeal require the use of a “high
flexural strength rigid epoxy resin” to bond the coaxial cable to
the annular locking member. Appellants and the examiner agree that
Toma discloses all of the claimed elements except for the noted
bonding agent (brief, page 5; answer, page 4). According to the
examiner (answer, pages 4 and 7 through 13), Shimirak discloses
(column 8, lines 48 through 51) the use of an epoxy resin to bond
or seal a coaxial cable to a connector. Based upon the teachings
of Shimirak, the examiner concludes (answer, pages 4 and 5) that:
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having
ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was
made to use a bonding agent (e.g. an epoxy resin) instead
of friction force to provide a stronger connection.
Additionally, it would have been within the skill of a
worker in the art at the time the invention was made to
elect a specific epoxy resin base[d] on their know[n]
characteristics, i.e. an epoxy resin that provides a pull
strength in excess of 10 pounds and antirotational
captivation up to 90
, to provide that desire[d] bonding
of the connector to the outer insulator.
Appeal No. 2003-1704
Application No. 09/604,141
4
Appellants argue (brief, page 8) that Shimirak uses an epoxy resin
to environmentally seal a coaxial cable 1000 to a cable tap housing
100, and that Shimirak does not disclose the use of a high flexural
strength rigid epoxy resin as a bonding agent that eliminates
movement between the coaxial cable and the housing. Appellants
also argue (brief, page 9; reply brief, page 6) that the examiner
has used impermissible hindsight to attribute the characteristics
of the epoxy resin disclosed and claimed by appellants to the epoxy
resin used by Shimirak.
We agree with appellants’ arguments. Appellants specifically
disclose (specification, page 11) a particular epoxy resin that
will perform the claimed functions of resisting movement and
rotation of the coaxial cable with respect to the annular locking
member. As indicated supra, Shimirak uses an epoxy resin for
environmentally sealing the coaxial cable to the cable tap housing.
Nothing in the applied references supports the examiner’s
conclusion that the skilled artisan would have known to select the
particular epoxy resin chosen by appellants to provide the claimed
resistance against movement and rotation. The only evidence of
record that supports the examiner’s contention is the appellants’
disclosure, and such evidence is not available to the examiner in
an obviousness rejection. Thus, the obviousness rejection of
Appeal No. 2003-1704
Application No. 09/604,141
5
claims 1 through 12, 14, 16, 18 through 21, 23 and 27 through 29 is
reversed.
The obviousness rejection of claims 13, 15, 22, 25 and 26 is
reversed because the teachings of DeHaan do not cure the noted
shortcoming in the teachings of Toma and Shimirak.
DECISION
The decision of the examiner rejecting claims 1 through 16, 18
through 23 and 25 through 29 is reversed.
REVERSED
KENNETH W. HAIRSTON )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
JOSEPH F. RUGGIERO ) APPEALS
Administrative Patent Judge ) AND
) INTERFERENCES
)
)
)
JOSEPH L. DIXON )
Administrative Patent Judge )
KWH/lp
Appeal No. 2003-1704
Application No. 09/604,141
6
JEFFREY M. KADEN ESQ.
c o GOTTLIEB RACKMAN & REISMAN
PC
270 MADISON AVENUE
NEW YORK, NY 10016