Appeal No. 1999-0519
Application 08/728,224
and 6) that the dynamic, spring-mass type vibration damper of
Hamada and the method of its operation are entirely different
than the shaft assembly and method for damping lateral vibra-
tions in a shaft defined in appellant’s claims 1, 4, 7 and 10
on appeal. As to method claim 1, even if the shaft of Hamada
were to have each of the basic characteristics set forth in
the preamble of the claim, there is no disclosure, teaching or
suggestion in Hamada of defining an “adjusted first order
critical frequency” (emphasis added) for the rotating shaft,
wherein the adjusted first order critical frequency is “equal
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007