Appeal No. 99-0650
Application 08/726,978
proposes to add one or more wave springs to the French ‘899
device at, for example, the location(s) of the helical coil
springs 4 and/or 19, or whether the examiner proposes to
replace one or more of the springs 4 and 19 of the French ‘899
device with wave springs. In any event, regardless of the
intended modification, the examiner’s position is not well
taken.
The structure of Cramer that the examiner refers to as a
wave spring is actually a tolerance ring 10 comprising a
spring steel cylinder 14 having corrugations 16. The Cramer
device is intended to compensate for radial play between inner
cylindrical member 18 and the hole 20 in a surrounding
structure. It would not have been obvious to the ordinarily
skilled artisan to replace either of the helical coil springs
of French ‘899 with a tolerance ring of the type taught by
Cramer because Cramer’s tolerance ring would not be capable of
providing the axial biasing forces French ‘899 intends the
springs to provide. See Ex parte Rosenfeld, 130 USPQ 113, 115
(Bd. App. 1961) (modification that renders apparatus
unsuitable for its intended purpose cannot be said to have
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007