Appeal No. 1998-2442
Application No. 08/155,987
thrust bearing sub-assembly for an electric motor, and are
reproduced in the appendix of appellant's brief.
The reference applied in the final rejection is:
Brezosky 4,293,170 Oct. 6,
1981
Claims 41 and 44 stand finally rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as unpatentable over Brezosky.1
Claim 41 recites, as steps (c) and (d) (emphasis added):
c) disposing a spring adjacent the thrust collar; and
d) positioning the hook projections in the apertures of
the thrust plate to secure the spring between the thrust
collar and the thrust plate thereby forming the thrust bearing
sub-assembly.
Brezosky generally discloses all the limitations of claim 41,
except that element 82, secured between thrust collar 70 and
thrust plate (bearing) 62 is not a spring, as called for by
steps (c) and (d), supra. Rather, Brezosky describes element
82 as a "pressed fiber lubricant seal" (col. 6, line 1), which
is press fit to shaft 18 (id., line 2). Element 82 serves as
1An additional rejection of claims 41 and 44 as
anticipated by Brezosky under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b), not having
been repeated in the examiner's answer, is presumably
withdrawn. Ex parte Emm, 118 USPQ 180 (Bd. App. 1957).
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007