Appeal No. 98-1447
Application 08/385,356
effect the broadly recited base bearing assembly of claim 1.
In particular, and contrary to the view advocated (reply
brief, page 3), it is our opinion that one of ordinary skill
in the art would have expected liquid to function
appropriately with the spherical surface bearing arrangement
of Unterberger, particularly in light of the applicability of
air or liquid for a spherical surface bearing as taught by
Blizard. No evidence has been proffered by appellant to
persuade us otherwise.
We turn now to the remaining claims on appeal.
Claims 2 and 17, claims from which all other claims on
appeal respectively depend directly or indirectly, require,
inter alia, an annular bottom surface of the pedestal and an
annular top surface for the base in opposition to the bottom
surface, with a film of liquid between the bottom surface of
the pedestal and the top surface of the base. Consistent with
appellant’s underlying disclosure (specification, page 7), the
claimed film of liquid maintained between the pedestal bottom
surface and the base top surface is fairly understood to
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007