Appeal No. 1997-3449 Page 12
Application No. 08/424,806
Here, the examiner admits, “[n]ot specifically taught is
the use of the level [of Kramer] on a dump bin trailer.”
(Examiner’s Answer, ¶ 11.) This is an understatement.
Kramer, the sole reference, teaches a “remote level sensor
enclosure 10 . . . ." Col. 5, ll. 15-16. The examiner,
however, has not shown a teaching or suggestion of using the
level sensor on a structure likely to increase in tilt, much
less on a vehicle having an elevating dump bin. In contrast
to the claimed invention, the reference uses the level sensor
on a structure being leveled. Specifically, Kramer mentions,
“level 10 might be placed on the chassis of a trailer which
requires leveling or on an overhead beam which is to be
leveled via jacks or the like.” Col. 7,
ll. 41-44.
The examiner also has not shown a teaching or suggestion
of stopping any action upon identification of any condition
much less stopping bin elevation upon identification of a
predetermined tilt. Kramer does teach “that the output of
sensors 94, signal conditioning amplifiers 95 or code
conversion circuitry 96 can be used as the input for other
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007