Ex parte Rupflin

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

Feb 28, 2000

08832654 (B.P.A.I. Feb. 28, 2000)

1
THIS OPINION WAS NOT WRITTEN FOR PUBLICATION
The opinion in support of the decision being entered today
(1) was not written for publication in a law journal and
(2) is not binding precedent of the Board.
Paper No. 22
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
_____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
_____________
Ex parte FRITZ RUPFLIN

_____________
Appeal No. 1999-2542
Application 08/832,654
______________
HEARD
_______________
Before COHEN, MCQUADE, and GONZALES, Administrative Patent
Judges.
COHEN, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is an appeal from the final rejection of claims 4
through 6 and 8 through 10, as amended subsequent to that
rejection. These claims constitute all of the claims
Appeal No. 1999-2542
Application No. 08/832654
Our understanding of this foreign language document is1
derived from a reading of a translation thereof prepared in
the United States Patent and Trademark Office. A copy of the
translation is appended to this opinion.
2
remaining in the application.
Appellant’s invention pertains to a connector rod for a
loom. An understanding of the invention can be derived from a
reading of exemplary claim 4, a copy of which appears in
“APPENDIX: A” appended to the main brief (Paper No. 16).
As evidence of obviousness, the examiner has applied the
documents listed below:
Nicholas 2,096,335 Oct. 19,
1937
Vinciguerra 4,770,584 Sep. 13,
1988
Winnie 5,004,361 Apr. 2,
1991
Corain et al. 2,621,262 Jul.
14, 1989
(Corain)(France) 1
The following rejections, found in the examiner’s answer
(Paper No. 17), are before us for review.
Appeal No. 1999-2542
Application No. 08/832654
3
Claims 4 through 6 and 8 through 10 stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Corain in view of
Nicholas.
Claims 4 through 6 and 8 through 10 stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Winnie in view of
Nicholas, further in view of Vinciguerra.
The full text of the examiner's rejections and response
to the argument presented by appellant appears in the answer
(Paper No. 17), while the complete statement of appellant’s
argument can be found in the main and reply briefs (Paper Nos.
16 and 18).

In the main brief (page 15), as corroborated on page 2 of
the reply brief, appellant groups independent claim 4 and
dependent claims 5, 6, 8, and 9 as a first group, and
dependent claim 10 as a second group.
OPINION
Appeal No. 1999-2542
Application No. 08/832654
In our evaluation of the documents relied upon, we have2
considered all of the disclosure of each reference for what it
would have fairly taught one of ordinary skill in the art.
See In re Boe, 355 F.2d 961, 965, 148 USPQ 507, 510 (CCPA
1966). Additionally, this panel of the board has taken into
account not only the specific teachings, but also the
inferences which one skilled in the art would reasonably have
been expected to draw from the disclosure. See In re Preda
401 F.2d 825, 826, 159 USPQ 342, 344 (CCPA 1968).
4
In reaching our conclusion on the obviousness issues
raised in this appeal, this panel of the board has carefully
considered appellants’ specification, drawing Figures 1
through 5, independent claim 4, the applied references, and2
the respective viewpoints of appellants and the examiner. As
a consequence of our review, we make the determinations which
follow.
We reverse the examiner’s respective rejections of
appellant’s claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
Claim 4, the sole independent claim, addresses a
connector rod for a loom, with the connector rod comprising,
inter alia, forked rod ends, each forked rod end comprising a
conical wall surrounding a countersunk conical recess, the
Appeal No. 1999-2542
Application No. 08/832654
5
conical wall comprising an open bottom including a deformable
single line edge (4), and a torque resistant engagement
between the deformable single line edge (4B) of the conical
wall (4A) of the conical recess and a female threaded nut (1),
the torque resistant engagement comprising as an integral part
of the female threaded nut serrations (11) having a plurality
of line ridges that deform
the deformable single line edge (4B) for holding the nut
against rotation and against unintended axial withdrawal.
Of particular importance to appellant’s overall
invention, and clearly an express requirement of the claimed
connector rod for a loom, is the coaction between a deformable
single line edge and serrations to effect a torque resistant
engagement for holding a nut against rotation and against
unintended axial withdrawal.
When we set aside in our minds what appellant has taught
us in the present application, and consider only the evidence
of obviousness as a whole, it is at once apparent to us that
Appeal No. 1999-2542
Application No. 08/832654
6
the now claimed invention would not have been obvious to one
having ordinary skill in the art on the basis of the applied
prior art. The evidence before us simply fails to be
suggestive of the interrelationship between a deformable
single line edge and serrations to hold a nut against rotation
and against unintended axial withdrawal in a connector rod for
a loom, as now claimed.
As to connector rods for looms, the Corain and
Vinciguerra documents reveal the respective use of a washer,
knurling, and elastic flexible flanges to inhibit nut
rotation, notwithstanding the obvious presence in each of
these documents of what would have been understood to be an
edge of a conical wall capable of being deformed. As to the
Winnie reference, we find that it likewise lacks any
suggestion for an interrelationship between a deformable
single line edge and serrations to hold a nut against rotation
and against unintended axial withdrawal.
The patent to Nicholas addresses a sheet metal nut and a
threaded screw member within the bore of a supporting part to
Appeal No. 1999-2542
Application No. 08/832654
7
secure the part and a plate together (Fig. 3). Fin-shaped
projections 8, with free edge 9, are pressed from the material
of the base 6 and shank 7 of the sheet metal nut (Figs. 3, 5,
and 6). As explained by the patentee (page 1, column 2, lines
29 through 35),
[w]hen the screw member is tightened in engagement
with the nut, the projections 8 will be drawn into
the support 2 (Fig. 3) and any rotation of the nut
will be prevented, and after the nut and screw are
in final engagement the projections embedded in the
support will aid in preventing the nut from becoming
unloosened.
Considering the Nicholas disclosure as a whole, and in
conjunction with the other applied prior art, it is clear to
us that the teaching thereof would not have been suggestive of
an interrelationship between a deformable single line edge and
serrations to hold a nut against rotation and against
unintended axial withdrawal, particularly in a connector rod
for a loom, as now claimed, wherein conical surfaces are
present and interact with one another.
While we have assessed the evidence of obviousness in its
Appeal No. 1999-2542
Application No. 08/832654
8
entirety, as above, and fully taken into account the point of
view of the examiner as expressed in the answer, for the
reasons articulated herein we are constrained to conclude that
the evidence before us simply does not support a conclusion of
obviousness.
In summary, this panel of the board has:
reversed the rejection of claims 4 through 6 and 8
through 10 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over
Corain in view of Nicholas; and
reversed the rejection of claims 4 through 6 and 8 through 10
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Winnie in
view of Nicholas and Vinciguerra.
No time period for taking any subsequent action
in connection with this appeal may be extended under
37 CFR § 1.136(a).
REVERSED
Appeal No. 1999-2542
Application No. 08/832654
9
)
IRWIN CHARLES COHEN )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
JOHN P. MCQUADE )
Administrative Patent Judge ) APPEALS AND
)
) INTERFERENCES
)
JOHN F. GONZALES )
Administrative Patent Judge )
ICC:lmb
Appeal No. 1999-2542
Application No. 08/832654
10
W. G. FASSE
INDIAN POND LANE
P.O. BOX K
ST. ALBANS, ME 04971