Appeal No. 98-1455 Page 14
Application No. 08/625,936
De Rose does not specifically teach the distance his
flange projects relative to the thickness of one of his side
plates 102. However, as shown in Figure 17, the distance his
flange projects is shown to be about equal to the thickness of
one of his side plates 102. Thus, De Rose would appear to
anticipate claim 19 and "anticipation is the epitome of
obviousness." Furthermore, it is our determination that the
relative projection distance of De Rose's flange relative to
the thickness of one of his side plates 102 would have been an
obvious matter of engineering design as in Kuhle.
Dependent claim 20 adds to parent claim 16 the limitation
that the flange is "capable of receiving a weld seam formable
at the weld site for integrally attaching the unitary body to
a torsion member, the weld seam having a thickness essentially
equal to a wall thickness of the flange."
De Rose's flange is clearly capable of receiving a weld
seam formable at the weld site for integrally attaching the
side plate 102 (i.e., unitary body) to a torsion member, the
Page: Previous 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007