Appeal No. 99-0650
Application 08/726,978
been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art). Likewise,
the addition of one or more tolerance rings to the French ‘899
device at the location called for by claim 7 would not have
been obvious because the added elements would not appear to
serve any useful purpose in the French ‘899 device. In this
regard, based on the teaching of the applied references alone,
and without the benefit of hindsight knowledge acquired by
first reading appellants’ disclosure, there is no cogent
reason for compensating for radial play between the various
components of the French ‘899 device. We therefore will not
sustain the standing § 103 rejection of claim 7.
Summary
The rejection of claims 1-3 and 8 as being anticipated by
French ‘899 is reversed as to claims 1-3, but is affirmed as
to claim 8.
The rejection of claim 7 as being unpatentable over
French ‘899 in view of Cramer is reversed.
The decision of the examiner is affirmed-in-part.
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007