Appeal No. 98-1200
Application 08/589,780
The appellant's position here is well taken.
Staniszewski and Lewis contain no suggestion whatsoever of a
mounting device having means for expanding into fast, radial-
gripping engagement with the bore of an element being mounted
on a shaft. The examiner's apparent contention that
Staniszewski's nut members 36 and 38, as modified in view of
Lewis to include shoulders extending into bore 11 of element
10, would expand into fast, radial-gripping engagement with
the bore if they were made of a plastic or malleable material
(see pages 3 and 4 in the answer) is not persuasive. Even if
these nut members were made of a plastic or malleable
material, it would be unduly speculative to conclude that they
would expand into a fast, radial-gripping engagement with the
bore. In short, Staniszewski and Lewis simply do not provide
the factual basis necessary to conclude that the mounting
device recited in claim 18, with its "means for . . .
expanding into fast, radial-gripping engagement with said
bore," would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the
art.
Accordingly, we shall not sustain the standing 35 U.S.C.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007