Appeal No. 97-2227
Application 08/254,978
shaft. However, consistent with the appellant’s specification
and the claimed subject matter as a whole, one of ordinary
skill in this art would consider the shaft 10 and the
secondary shaft 54 to collectively define the claimed central
drive shaft. Note, for example, that claim 3 (which depends
on claim 1) sets forth that the sun gear is “secured on said
shaft.” Inasmuch as (1) the only shaft previously recited is
the “central rotary drive shaft” in parent claim 1 and (2)
that the sun gear 80 is in fact mounted on secondary shaft 54,
it would be readily apparent to the artisan that the claimed
“central rotary drive shaft” refers collectively to drive
shaft 10 and secondary shaft 54. This is particularly the
case, since these two shafts are splined together and rotate
as a unit to provide rotary motion to the various gears.
As to the position in the answer, the examiner apparently
believes that the second drive train means cannot be
considered to be independent of the first drive train means
since they are both driven by the same “shaft.” However, as
the appellant has correctly articulated on pages 1 and 2 of
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007