Appeal No. 97-4097
Application 08/442,525
Claims 10 through 13 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 as unpatentable over Fleemin in view of Muscat.
A further understanding of the examiner's position
with respect to the rejections on appeal can be had by refer-
ence to pages 3 through 5 of the Examiner's Answer.
OPINION
We have carefully reviewed the rejections on appeal
in light of the arguments of the appellant and the examiner.
As a result of this review, we have reached the conclusion
that the applied prior art does not establish the anticipation
or obviousness of any claim on appeal. Therefore, the rejec-
tions on appeal are reversed. Our reasons follow.
Appellant argues on pages 5 and 6 of the brief that
the primary reference to Fleemin does not disclose a means for
automatically varying at least one of the direction of rota-
tion of the output shaft of the motor and the speed of rota-
tion of the output shaft between at least two states in a
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007