Appeal No. 1999-0215
Application No. 08/530,282
inner side, an end part and an annular ear projecting outward
from the end part, the base part including an inner peripheral
portion, a bent part, and an outer peripheral portion, with
the outer peripheral portion formed into a “tapered shape”,1
and wherein the diameter of the outer peripheral portion is
increased toward the inner side in the axial direction.
We, of course, read and comprehend the content of claim
1, assessed as a whole, in view of the underlying disclosure.
From that perspective, it is at once apparent to us that
claim 1 mandates an integrally formed sheet metal pulley,
i.e., the “integral design” argued by appellants (main brief,
page 4). More particularly, we appreciate that claim 1
specifies a cylindrical peripheral wall “having” an end part
and an annular ear projecting from said end part, which
cylindrical peripheral wall is integrally formed with the base
part. Accordingly, it is the view of this panel of the board
that claim 1 is fairly understood to require the annular ear
1Read in light of the disclosure, inclusive of the
showing in Figs. 1 and 2, it is apparent to us that the
recitation of a “tapered shape” in claim 1 denotes an angled
shape for the outer peripheral portion, an interpretation
consistent with the “taper angle” language of dependent claims
2 and 3.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007