Ex parte YUICHI ONO et al. - Page 2

                Appeal No. 96-1835                                                                                                            
                Application 08/207,116                                                                                                        

                         The invention relates to a fluid clutch.  Claim 1 is                                                                 
                illustrative and reads as follows:                                                                                            
                         1.      A fluid clutch comprising a driving section, a rotation                                                      
                shaft rotatably driven by said driving section, a driving disc                                                                
                rigidly mounted to and rotationally driven by said rotational                                                                 
                shaft, a casing in which said driving disc is incorporated and                                                                
                which is rotatably disposed around said rotational shaft as a                                                                 
                center of rotation, such that a torque transmission gap is                                                                    
                defined between said driving disc and the casing, and an oil                                                                  
                filled in the torque transmission gap defined between said                                                                    
                driving disc and the casing for transmitting a driving torque                                                                 
                from said driving disc to said casing, wherein                                                                                
                         a non-rotatable oil supply pipe communicates from a location                                                         
                external of the casing into the casing and wherein an oil supply                                                              
                means is non-rotatably mounted to the portion of the oil supply                                                               
                pipe external of the casing for selectively supplying and                                                                     
                returning said oil between the outside and the inside of said                                                                 
                casing and for selectively increasing and decreasing the driving                                                              
                torque transmitted from the driving disc to the casing, said                                                                  
                casing further including at least one breather extending through                                                              
                said casing between the torque transmission gap and atmospheric                                                               
                air for releasing gas from said torque transmission chamber when                                                              
                pressure in said torque transmission chamber exceeds a                                                                        
                predetermined upper limit value and for enabling inflow of                                                                    
                atmospheric air to said torque transmission chamber when pressure                                                             
                in the torque transmission chamber is less than a predetermined                                                               
                lower limit value.                                                                                                            
                         Claims 1, 2, 14, 18 and 19 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.                                                            
                 112, first paragraph, as being based upon a specification which                                                             
                purportedly fails “to provide an adequate written description of                                                              
                the invention” (answer, mailed June 13, 1995, page 3).   The                              2                                   

                         2In the final rejection, claims 1, 2, 14, 18 and 19 were                                                             
                also rejected under 35 U.S.C.  103.  The examiner has since                                                                  
                withdrawn all such prior art rejections (see the advisory action                                                              
                dated April 19, 1995).                                                                                                        

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

Last modified: November 3, 2007