Appeal No. 98-0005
Application No. 08/613,808
would be no reason to add a plurality of angled grooves to its
surface. Nor, for that matter, would there be a reason to add
such grooves to Maley’s cam surface (f ), since it does not2
rotate in contact with the work piece, but simply acts upon an
inclined surface provided on the edge of the work piece. In
our opinion, the rejection fails at this point.
Adding Andrew to the primary reference does not alleviate
this problem. Andrew discloses a work piece clamping device
which in one embodiment presses the work piece against the
base plate, and in the other does not. In the embodiment
shown in Figure 2, circular teeth (19), which are not angled
as are screw threads, engage the edge of the work piece.
Rotating the screw (14) causes it to displace downwardly by
action of the screw threads (15), thus pressing the work piece
against the base plate; however, there are no angled grooves
on the portion that engages the edge of the work piece in this
embodiment. Angled threads (28) are in contact with the edge
of the work piece in the version shown in Figure 3. However,
they are matching but oppositely oriented to screw threads
(25) of the rotating member (26), so that when the latter is
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007