Appeal No. 97-2412
Application No. 08/330,136
Particularly in light of Exhibit A2, it is quite apparent
to this panel of the board that the respective transmissions
disclosed in the Nissan Manual and Figs. 1 and 2 of the
present application are clearly different as to sleeve
structure. Thus, the aforementioned Figs. 1 and 2 do not
depict the prior art transmission of the Nissan Manual, but
instead portray appellant’s own invention. Obviously, the
reference to the Nissan Manual in appellant’s specification
(page 3) was not intended to indicate that the Manual
disclosed the presently claimed invention. It follows, of
course, that the now claimed transmission with a sleeve having
first and second sleeve portions is clearly not anticipated
under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) by the different transmission of the
Nissan Manual.
In summary, this panel of the board has reversed the
examiner’s rejection of appellant’s claims 1 through 4 under
35 U.S.C. § 102(b).
REVERSED
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007