Appeal No. 99-0201
Application No. 08/696,283
of ordinary skill in the art would have appreciated that the
curvature at the ends of the rollers is provided for the
purpose of permitting lubricant to protect the components by
circulating around the rollers while still providing
sufficient area on the end faces of the rollers to transmit
axial thrust, and not to protect the edges of the rollers from
being crushed.
In the brake system disclosed by Majewski no lubricant is
circulated around the rollers, and any end thrust that might
be generated would appear to be accommodated through annular
end faces at 52 and 54, which already are of reduced diameter.
There thus would appear to be no reason to provide the rollers
with curved surfaces. The mere fact that the prior art
structure could be modified does not make such a modification
obvious unless the prior art suggests the desirability of
doing so. See In re Gordon, 733 F.2d 900, 902, 221 USPQ 1125,
1127 (Fed. Cir. 1984). We fail to perceive any teaching,
suggestion or incentive which would have led one of ordinary
skill in the art to provide modify the Majewski rollers in the
manner proposed by the examiner. From our perspective, the
only suggestion to do so is found in the luxury of the
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007