Appeal No. 1998-0106
Application No. 08/377,753
A copy of the appealed claims is appended to
appellants= brief.
The following references are relied upon by the
examiner as evidence of obviousness in support of his
rejection under 35 U.S.C. ' 103:
Schlecher et al. (Schlecher) 4,909,773 Mar. 20, 1990
Takeda 4,968,292 Nov. 6, 1990
Claims 15-18, 20-22, 24 and 26 stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. ' 103 as being unpatentable over Schlecher in view
of Takeda. The examiner concludes that the teachings of
Takeda would have made it obvious to Aprovide Schlecher
et al with uneven circumferential spacing for the [feather]
keys . . .@ (corrected answer, Paper No. 17, pages 5-6).
Reference is made to the examiner=s corrected answer for
further details of this rejection.
In support of patentability, appellants contend that
Takeda constitutes non-analogous art (see page 14 of
appellants= corrected brief, Paper No. 14 filed April 25,
1997). Appellants additionally argue that Takeda lacks a
teaching or suggestion of the modifications necessary to
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007