Appeal No. 96-1305
Application 08/188,629
of ball supporting members is larger than a diameter of said
plurality of holes;
means for retaining said plurality of ball supporting
members in said central passages such that the portion of each
of said plurality of ball supporting members extends from an
associated one of said plurality of holes; and
a ball rotatably disposed on said first side against the
extending portions of each of said plurality of ball
supporting members.
The following reference is relied on by the examiner:
Mimlitch et al. (Mimlitch) 5,171,978 Dec. 15,
1992
(filed Nov. 22, 1991)
Claims 10, 12 to 14 and 17 to 19 stand rejected under 35
U.S.C. § 103. As evidence of obviousness, the examiner relies
upon appellants’ admitted prior art as to claims 18 and 19,
with the addition of Mimlitch as to claims 10, 12 to 14 and
17.
Rather than repeat the positions of the appellants and
the examiner, reference is made to the brief and the answer
for the respective details thereof.
OPINION
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007