Appeal No. 97-0766 Page 8
Application No. 08/287,448
Claims 18 through 22
We sustain the examiner's rejection of claims 18 through
22 under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
The test for obviousness is what the combined teachings
of the references would have suggested to one of ordinary
skill in the art. See In re Young, 927 F.2d 588, 591, 18
USPQ2d 1089, 1091 (Fed. Cir. 1991) and In re Keller, 642 F.2d
413, 425, 208 USPQ 871, 881 (CCPA 1981). Moreover, in
evaluating such references it is proper to take into account
not only the specific teachings of the references but also the
inferences which one skilled in the art would reasonably be
expected to draw therefrom. In re Preda, 401 F.2d 825, 826,
159 USPQ 342, 344 (CCPA 1968).
Claim 18 recites an annular machine part, comprising,
inter alia, a planar hub ring, an annular machine element, a
layer of viscoelastic material, an annular belt pulley and a
flywheel. Claim 18 further recites that the flywheel is
attached to an outer surface of the annular belt pulley and
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007