Appeal No. 1999-2131 Page 3
Application No. 08/971,504
a thrust washer being disposed between the cutter and the
bearing spindle, wherein the thrust washer floats within the
cutter in response to a first load condition and locks within
the cutter in response to a second load condition.
THE PRIOR ART
The prior art references of record relied upon by the
examiner in rejecting the appealed claims are:
Drake 5,161,898 Nov. 10, 1992
Du Mond et al. (Du Mond), "Nonferrous Alloys for Wear
Applications", 589-591, Metals Handbook, vol. 3, (9th ed.
1980)
THE REJECTIONS1
Claims 1 through 74 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. §
103(a) as being unpatentable over Drake in view of Du Mond.
Claims 1 through 74 stand rejected under the judicially-
created doctrine of double patenting over claims 1 through 27
1 Rejections under the judicially-created doctrine of double patenting and
obviousness-type double patenting are stated in the final rejection (Paper No.
5). The appellants argue these rejections at pages 9 and 10 of the brief and
at pages 7 and 8 of the reply brief. Notwithstanding that the examiner has
not repeated these rejections in the Grounds of Rejection portion of the
answer, he does argue the merits at page 5 of the answer. Accordingly, we
consider that both appellants and the examiner view these rejections as being
on appeal and therefore we will decide the merits of these rejections on the
record before us for review.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007