In Re Richard C. Sovish, Marc F. Moisson, and Frank K.A. Selleslags

769 F.2d 738, 226 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 771, 1985 U.S. App. LEXIS 15040
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit·Decided July 26, 1985·No. Appeal 85-781·Published·Cited by 15 cases

Opinion

RICH, Circuit Judge.

This appeal is from the decision of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) Board of Appeals (board) affirming the examiner’s rejection of claims 1-6, 8-10, 15-17, 19, 21-23, and 31-34 of application serial No. 79,335, filed September 22, 1979, for “Heat Recoverable Article,” by Richard C. Sovish, Marc F.L. Moisson and Frank K.A. Selleslags (Sovish). Some claims (24-30) have been allowed. Others, to a non-elected invention, were withdrawn. We affirm.

The Invention

In numerous wiring systems such as electrical supply, telephone, cable TV, and the like, junctions or outlet boxes are used, into and out of which wires or cables pass. Such boxes may be made at least in part of heat-recoverable material or have aperture members made thereof, their characteristic being that when heated they shrink, return, or “recover” to a smaller size and thereby are able to close upon a cable or the like to form a hermetic seal. The invention relates to the temporary or permanent plugging of such aperture members and involves a novel plug in the form of a cylindrical hollow body (first part) closed at one end by a cap (second part). This plug may be positioned in an aperture member or conduit to close it until such time as it is desired to insert a cable or the like there-through, the aperture member then being shrunk around the plug by heating. When the cable is to be inserted, the cap or “second part” is first knocked off, the cable passed through the “first part” or hollow body, and the aperture member further or again heated. This will cause the tubular part of the plug to be forced out, extruded, or “milked out” as the application says (presumably by analogy to milking a cow), due to its tapered shape. The aperture member will then shrink tightly upon and seal the cable. The following figures from the drawings will give an understanding of the invention’s structure.

*739

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

In Re Richard C. Sovish, Marc F. Moisson, and Frank K.A. Selleslags, 769 F.2d 738, 226 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 771, 1985 U.S. App. LEXIS 15040 (Fed. Cir. 1985).

769 F.2d 738 (In Re Richard C. Sovish, Marc F. Moisson, and Frank K.A. Selleslags) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Corephotonics, Ltd. v. Apple Inc.
84 F.4th 990 (Federal Circuit, 2023)
American Innotek, Inc. v. United States
128 Fed. Cl. 135 (Federal Claims, 2016)
Genzyme Corp. v. ATRIUM MEDICAL CORP.
315 F. Supp. 2d 552 (D. Delaware, 2004)
General American Transportation Corp. v. Cryo-Trans, Inc.
893 F. Supp. 774 (N.D. Illinois, 1995)
In Re Iris J. Davis
26 F.3d 139 (Federal Circuit, 1994)
Glaxo, Inc. v. Novopharm Ltd.
830 F. Supp. 871 (E.D. North Carolina, 1993)
Wang Laboratories, Inc. v. Toshiba Corporation
993 F.2d 858 (Federal Circuit, 1993)
Wang Laboratories, Inc. v. Toshiba Corp.
993 F.2d 858 (Federal Circuit, 1993)
In Re Carl D. Clay
966 F.2d 656 (Federal Circuit, 1992)
Standard Manufacturing Co. v. United States
25 Cl. Ct. 1 (Court of Claims, 1991)
Pratt & Whitney Canada, Inc. v. United States
17 Cl. Ct. 777 (Court of Claims, 1989)
In Re Ole K. Nilssen
847 F.2d 841 (Federal Circuit, 1988)
Twin Disc, Inc. v. United States
10 Cl. Ct. 713 (Court of Claims, 1986)