Appeal 2007-1670
Application 10/102,565
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
The Appellants seek our review under 35 U.S.C. § 134 of the final rejection
of claims 1, 3, 5-12, 16-24, and 31-42, which are all of the pending claims. We
have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b) (2002).
SUMMARY OF DECISION
We AFFIRM-IN-PART.
THE INVENTION
The Appellants’ invention is to a door panel assembly including a window
regulator drum housing for use in vehicles. The Appellants’ Specification
describes that in prior art door panel assemblies, the cable drum is secured to a wet
side of a door inner panel and the motor is secured to a dry side of the door inner
panel (Specification 1:4-6). The Specification explains that “[a] problem with this
design is the importance of aligning the cable drum housing accurately with the
motor” (Specification 1:7-8). The Specification further explains, “The
sandwiching of the door inner panel between these two components adds a further
manufacturing tolerance error” (Specification 1:8-9). As such, the Appellants’
invention is directed to a door panel assembly where the mounting feature for the
drive assembly (motor) and the mounting feature for the cable drum are located on
the same side of the door panel (Specification 1:9-2:3). Claims 1, 10, and 35,
reproduced below, are representative of the subject matter on appeal.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013