Appeal 2006-1865
Application 09/660,433
Patent 5,802,641
In stark contrast, the applicant claims, as amended, a support
device which is fixed from rotation about its longitudinal axis by a
fixed or force fit within the mounting device.
The argument directly above again addressed limitations (2) and (6).
19. In the Amendment at page 5, Appellant argued the following as to the
amended claims:
Klevstad does not teach a single actuator which simultaneously
releases the support device to move about first and second axes which
are transverse to each other and to the longitudinal axis of the support
device.
The actuator (43) of Klevstad only releases the support device
to allow movement about pin 36 and about the longitudinal axis (39)
of the support device. In order to enable movement about a second
axis transverse to the first axis and the longitudinal axis of the support
device, locking bolt 34 must also be adjusted.
Thus, Klevstad requires the adjustment of two actuators in
order to allow movement about two axes transverse to each other and
to the longitudinal axis of the support device.
In stark contrast, the applicant claims a single actuator which
simultaneously clamps or releases the mounting device and the
support device, fixed from rotation about its longitudinal axis within
the mounting device, to enable the support device to move jointly
about both the first and second axes.
The argument directly above again addressed limitations (1)-(7).
20. On March 30, 1998, a Notice of Allowability was mailed which stated
that pending claims 1-13 were allowed.
- 10 -
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013