Appeal No. 96-3202
Application No. 08/183,464
claims at issue are to be ascertained. Graham v. John Deere
Co., 383 U.S. 1, 17-18, 148 USPQ 459, 467 (1966).
The differences between Shiraya and claim 1 are the
limitations that (1) the cam is mounted on a cam shaft, (2) a
solid film lubricant is impregnated and anchored in the
porosity of the outer surface of the cam, and (3) the solid
film lubricant on the outer surfaces of the cam and the tappet
being stable to temperatures at about 700°F. to retain a low
coefficient of friction and promote rapid formation of a
stable oil film to reduce friction.
In applying the above noted test for obviousness, we
reach the conclusion that it would have been obvious to one of
ordinary skill in the art at the time of the appellants'
invention to
mount Shiraya's cam on a cam shaft and to provide the outer
surface of the cam with a solid film lubricant in order to
achieve excellent wear-resisting and friction-resisting
performance even at high temperature with dry conditions in
which engines are used as suggested by Oda. Additionally, it
13
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007