Ex Parte Abels et al - Page 5

               Appeal 2007-1549                                                                            
               Application 10/632,017                                                                      
               one another (App. Br. 8); and (3) a sliding ring having a sliding surface                   
               facing the joint ball that is adjacent to the ball race (Reply Br. 2).                      
                      Appellants’ first argument is based on Yao’s description of the sliding              
               ring (A1) as being embedded in the sealing bellows (8) (App. Br. 6).                        
               According to Appellants, because the sealing bellows (8) touches the ball                   
               race (13) on three sides, the sealing bellows (8) cannot slide in the ball race             
               (13) and as such, the embedded sliding ring (A1) also cannot slide in the ball              
               race (13) (App. Br. 7).  Therefore, according to Appellants, Yao does not                   
               disclose that the “sliding ring slides within the ball race” (App. Br. 7).                  
                      The Examiner agrees with Appellants that the sealing ring (A1) is                    
               embedded in the sealing bellows (8).  However, the Examiner asserts that,                   
               although the sliding ring is embedded, because the recesses of the ring                     
               projections (11) contain lubricant that permits sliding and rotation between                
               the sealing bellows (8) and the ball race (13), the sliding ring (A1) will also             
               slide along with the sealing bellows when the sealing bellows slides relative               
               to the ball race 13 (Ans. 8).  As best seen in Figure 3 of Yao, the embedded                
               ring (A1) is positioned within the ball race (13) and slides along with the                 
               sealing bellows (8) when the bellows slides relative to the ball race (13),                 
               thereby sliding “in said ball race.”  Therefore, we agree with the Examiner’s               
               finding that the sliding ring of Yao is “mounted to slide in said ball race.”               
                      Addressing Appellants’ second and third arguments, the crux of the                   
               arguments rests on whether Yao discloses all of the argued elements of                      
               claim 1. "A claim is anticipated only if each and every element as set forth in             
               the claim is found, either expressly or inherently described, in a single prior             
               art reference." Verdegaal Bros. v. Union Oil Co. of California, 814 F.2d                    
               628, 631, cert. denied, 484 U.S. 827 (1987).  The Examiner found that Yao                   

                                                    5                                                      

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

Last modified: September 9, 2013