Ex Parte Sahr et al - Page 2




              Appeal No. 2004-0713                                                                Page 2                
              Application No. 09/900,256                                                                                


                                                   BACKGROUND                                                           
                     The appellants' invention is a power-assisted steering apparatus for turning                       
              steerable wheels of a vehicle.  The apparatus comprises a rack bar that is connectable                    
              with the steerable wheels of the vehicle.  Linear movement of the rack bar turns the                      
              steerable wheels.  The apparatus also includes a hydraulic motor for, when actuated,                      
              moving the rack bar linearly and a one-piece monolithic component.  The one-piece                         
              monolithic component has a pinion gear portion for meshingly engaging the rack bar, a                     
              valve sleeve portion for cooperating with a valve core for actuating the hydraulic motor,                 
              and a torsion bar portion for connection with the valve core and twisting in response to                  
              rotation of the valve core relative to the valve sleeve portion to actuate the hydraulic                  
              motor (specification, pp. 1-2).  A copy of the claims under appeal is set forth in the                    
              appendix to the appellants' brief.                                                                        


                     Claims 1 to 4 and 7 to 9 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being                             
              unpatentable over U.S. Patent No. 6,021,6851 to Sonoda et al. (Sonoda).                                   


                     Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and                      
              the appellants regarding the above-noted rejection, we make reference to the answer                       
              (Paper No. 12, mailed July 30, 2003) for the examiner's complete reasoning in support                     

                     1 Issued February 8, 2000.                                                                         







Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007