Ex parte RUSSELL - Page 2




          Appeal No. 97-4209                                                          
          Application No. 08/532,507                                                  


               This is a decision on an appeal from the examiner's final              
          rejection of claims 20, 21, 29, and 30 which are all the                    
          claims pending in the application.  Claims 1 through 19 and 22              
          through 28 have been canceled.  Appellant's claimed subject                 
          matter is a grinding wheel.  Claim 20 is exemplary of the                   
          subject matter on appeal and recites:                                       
          20. Grinding wheel construction for cutting teeth into a belt               
          blank to produce a timing belt, said wheel construction                     
          comprising:                                                                 
               a wheel (58) having an axis of rotation (F) and an                     
          abrasive peripheral grinding surface (100) of predetermined                 
          width;                                                                      
               and characterized by said grinding surface (100) having a              
          concave profile across said width and a plurality of radially               
          projecting grinding ribs (106) extending circumferentially                  
          about the periphery of said grinding surface (106) and spaced               
          laterally across the width of said grinding surface (100).                  
                                   THE REFERENCES                                     
               The examiner has relied on the following references:                   
          Miller                      2,144,987               Jan. 24, 1939           
          Quintilio                   5,373,666               Dec. 20, 1994           
                                                      (filed Mar. 22, 1993)           
                                   THE REJECTIONS                                     
               Claims 20, 21, 29 and 30 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.                
          § 103 as being unpatentable over Miller in view Quintilio.                  



                                         -2-                                          





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007