Appeal No. 98-0816
Application 08/286,287
providing magnetic flux flow and electric flow between the rotor and shaft, and a shield adhesivelessly
attached to the rotor for biasing the magnetic seal assembly to a radially-extending surface of the rotor
(see claim 12). The examiner admits (see Answer, page 15) that the primary reference to Elsasser fails
to teach attaching a shield to the rotor without adhesives, relies upon Cossette to teach the shield
(although attached with adhesives), and relies upon Tatukawa to teach the elimination of adhesives
(albeit, to attach rotor magnets and not a shield).
We agree with appellants (see Brief, pages 41 to 42) that neither Elsasser nor Cossette teaches
a shield which is adhesively attached to the rotor, and that Tatukawa fails to teach or suggest
adhesiveless attachment of a shield to a rotor. More specifically, we find that one of ordinary skill in the
art would not have modified the spindle assembly of Elsasser, as modified to include the shield of
Cossette, with the cup-shaped magnet retainer member 5 of Tatukawa which attaches magnets 4
without adhesive, in order to attach the shield of Cossette. This is because, as properly pointed out by
appellants (see Brief, page 42), use of Tatukawa’s shield would prohibit proper magnetic seal assembly
function in Elsasser and Cossette. This is due to the fact that magnetic flux flow and electric flow are
needed between the rotor and the shaft, and use of a cup-shaped retaining member inside the magnetic
seal assembly would interfere and prevent direct magnetic flux flow and electric flow from occurring
between the rotor and shaft.
Accordingly, we will reverse the examiner’s rejection of claim 12 based on Elsasser in view of
Cossette and Tatukawa. We note that the examiner additionally relied upon Hoyer-Ellefsen in the
9
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007