Appeal No. 2000-1737
Application No. 08/965,180
the molybdenum alloy of Okada to have the composition taught
by the article in order to increase the hardness and strength
of the frictional surface at elevated temperatures.
Claim 5 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
unpatentable over Okada '451 in view of The Science and
Technology article and Marin as applied to claims 1 and 4 and
further in view of patent '827 to Okada. The examiner states
that Okada '827 discloses a cross-hatch pattern on the
frictional surface 9d. Therefore, it is the examiner's
conclusion that it would have been obvious to have constructed
the tiles of Okada '451 to have a cross-hatch pattern as
taught by Okada '827 in order to reduce abrasion on the guide
rail and eliminate uneven contact.
Claims 6 and 7 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
unpatentable over Okada '451 in view of The Science and
Technology article and Marin and further in view of Black.
According to the examiner, Black would have rendered obvious
at the time the invention was made the placement of tiles in
Okada '451 via a layer of heat resistant rubber to provide
high conformability in the elevator safety brake.
OPINION
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007