Ex parte MACCLEOD et al. - Page 3




          Appeal No. 1998-0695                                                        
          Application 08/400,320                                                      


          contacting the inner surface of the bearing sleeve and axially              
          contacting the upper and lower bearing contact surfaces,                    
          respectively; and                                                           
               a shaft/hub assembly, supported by the inner races of the              
          upper and lower ball bearing assemblies,                                    
               the shaft/hub assembly including a radially extending                  
          flange portion having a lower surface in proximity to an upper              
          surface of the outer race of the upper ball bearing assembly                
          and having an outer surface in proximity to the inner surface               
          of the bearing sleeve, so that a labyrinth seal is formed                   
          between said flange portion of said shaft/hub assembly and                  
          said outer race of said upper ball bearing assembly and said                
          inner surface of said bearing sleeve.                                       
          The examiner relies on the following references:                            
          Crapo                         4,858,044          Aug. 15, 1989              
          Elsasser et al. (Elsasser)    5,001,581          Mar. 19, 1991              
          Tanaka et al. (Tanaka)        5,256,922          Oct. 26, 1993              
                                                       (Apr. 8, 1992)                 
          Claims 1 and 6-9 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103.                      
          As evidence of obviousness the examiner offers Crapo in view                
          of Elsasser and Tanaka with respect to claims 1 and 6-8, and                
          only Crapo and Tanaka with respect to claim 9.                              
          Rather than repeat the arguments of appellant or the                        
          examiner, we make reference to the brief and the answer for                 
          the respective details thereof.                                             
          OPINION                                                                     
          We have carefully considered the subject matter on                          

                                         -3-                                          





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007