Ex Parte Abels et al - Page 3

               Appeal 2007-1549                                                                            
               Application 10/632,017                                                                      
                                  a bearing shell inserted into said housing;                              
                                  a ball pivot with a joint ball mounted                                   
                            pivotally in all directions in said bearing shell;                             
                                  a sealing bellows between the housing and                                
                            the ball pivot, said sealing bellows having a pivot-                           
                            side edge area;                                                                
                                  a ball race fixed on said ball pivot; and                                
                                  a sliding ring receiving said pivot-side edge                            
                            area of said sealing bellows, said sliding ring being                          
                            mounted to slide in said ball race, said sliding ring                          
                            having a sliding surface facing the joint ball                                 
                            arranged adjacent to the ball race, wherein said                               
                            ball race has a leg which is in contact with said                              
                            sliding ring, said leg comprising lugs arranged at                             
                            spaced locations from one another.                                             
                                                                                                          
                                           THE REJECTIONS                                                  
                      The Examiner relies upon the following as evidence of                                
               unpatentability:                                                                            
                      Gardner   US 2,197,037  Apr. 16, 1940                                                
                      Yao (as translated)  JP 2-199317   Aug. 7, 1990                                      
                      Appellants seek review of the Examiner’s rejections of claims 1, 5, 9-               
               10, 12, 14, 17, 20, 23, and 29 under 35 U.S.C. 102(b) as anticipated by Yao                 
               and, claims 30 and 31 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as obvious over Yao in view                    
               of Gardner.2                                                                                
                      The Examiner provides reasoning in support of the rejections in the                  
               Answer (mailed November 16, 2006).  Appellants present opposing                             

                                                                                                          
               2 The rejection of claims 1 and 28 as anticipated by Amrath has been                        
               withdrawn (Ans. 3).                                                                         
                                                    3                                                      

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

Last modified: September 9, 2013