Appeal 2006-2483
Application 10/371,785
Rejection over JP ‘220
JP ’220 discloses a buffer that functions as a suspension system of a
vehicle (JP ’220, p. 3). The device includes an electrical coil (13) and a
housing (10) having an inner chamber (10a) containing a magnetic fluid,
magnetic pole plates (15) attached to the housing, and magnetic pole plates
(18) attached to a shaft (11) and interleaved with the magnetic pole plates
attached to the housing (JP ’220, pp. 6-8). The magnetic pole plates
attached to the shaft rotate relative to the magnetic pole plates attached to the
housing (JP ’220, p. 9). “[W]hen an appropriate amount of current is
transmitted to the electric coil 13 at the time of above-mentioned rotation, a
magnetic field is generated between both magnetic pole plates 15, 18. Then,
the viscosity of the magnetic fluid filled in the inner chamber 10a of the
housing 10 (i.e., magnetic fluid provided between the magnetic pole plates
15, 18) increases to create a phenomenon of preventing the relative rotation
of both magnetic pole plates 15, 18” (JP ’220, p. 9).
The Appellant argues that the Examiner has not established that
JP ‘220 discloses an MR fluid or a magnetic flux generator capable of 1)
driving a magnetic flux through the MR fluid in a direction transverse to the
orientation of the plates, and 2) varying the strength of the driven magnetic
flux (Br. 11). Even the English abstract of JP ‘220 discloses an MR fluid
and teaches that energizing coil 13 increases the viscosity of the MR fluid,
thereby suppressing relative rotation of magnetic pole boards 15 and 18.
That disclosure also appears at pages 7-9 of the English translation of
JP ‘220. The English translation also indicates that the strength of the
magnetic flux is variable (JP ’220, p. 9). As indicated by the Appellant’s
Specification (p. 7, ll. 25-30), the JP ‘220 magnetic field necessarily must be
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013