Appeal No. 95-1401
Application 07/885,364
most clearly be seen with reference to Figures 1 and 2 of
KOHMOTO, since both of the cam followers 21b (two of which are
shown in Figure 2) are aligned within a single plane passing
through the center of the pins 21b and transverse to the optical
axis of the lens, the cam ring 20 can skew about this plane."
Kohmoto states (col. 2, line 68, to col. 3, line 2): "The three
front lens cam grooves 20a are preferably spaced from one another
at a substantially equiangular distance." Thus, although shown
opposite each other in figure 2, the cam followers 21b are not
opposite each other, but are at different phases just as pin 24a
and pin 21b are shown in the same view even though they are not
in the same plane (col. 3, lines 45-48): "Note that the pin 24a
is shown in the same sectional view as the pin 21b for the
purpose of clarification, but in fact they are located at
different phases [sic, (]that is, they actually do not appear in
the same sectional view)." Thus, we do not agree with
appellant's argument that Kohmoto shows oppositely aligned cam
pins which are substantially the same as the admitted prior art.
However, while Kohmoto discloses a plurality of circumferentially
spaced cam grooves to overcome the problem of inclination or
deviation of the optical axis (col. 1, lines 30-55), it does not
disclose or suggest appellant's claimed solution of
circumferentially aligned cam grooves which are offset in the
- 7 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007