Appeal No. 97-4081
Application 08/379,793
With respect to claim 5 rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102 and claims 6 through 8 rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103,
these
claims require the cylinders to be interconnected so that
fluid may flow from one cylinder to the other. The reference
does not disclose such a structure and it seems clear that if
the motor 35 were replaced by a pump to operate the hydraulic
embodiment, the cylinders would not be interconnected but
would be connected through the agency of the pump to a
reservoir. Furthermore, the examiner has not stated a
rationale of just why it would have been obvious to
interconnect the cylinders of Chatenay épouse Compagnone.
Since the examiner's rejections of claims 5 through 8 do not
rest on a sound evidentiary basis, we are constrained to
reverse these rejections.
SUMMARY
The rejections of claims 1 through 8 are reversed.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007