Appeal No. 1999-0641 Page 6
Application No. 08/536,654
3) in the wall of the body and a biasing means (spring 10) disposed between an internal face
(global projection R ) of the body and the near (right as seen in Figure 2) end face of the
1
driving shaft (5) which biases the body to the right as seen in Figure 2. Although the shaft (7)
is not rigidly connected to the hub, we note that the pin (9) is "fixed" or "fastened" at both
ends thereof to the body (1) at holes (4) (translation, page 2, lines 12-13, the sentence bridging
pages 3 and 4 and the sentence bridging pages 4 and 5). Further, we observe that the pin (9),
in being fixed to the body (1), rotates therewith in response to rotation of the driving shaft (5)
and, thus, is a "first rotating member" as recited in claim 1. The global projection (R )5
2
functions as a universal joint, thereby rendering the distal end of the driving shaft (5) movable
both axially with respect to a major axis of the pin (9) and radially away from the major axis of
the pin (9). Of course, the grooves (3) permit movement of the pin (6) and driving shaft (5)
radially toward and away from the major axis of the pin (9), as well.
CONCLUSION
To summarize, the decision of the examiner to reject claims 1 and 3 under 35 U.S.C.
5 In proceedings before it, the PTO applies to the verbiage of the proposed claims the broadest reasonable
meaning of the words in their ordinary usage as they would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art, taking
into account whatever enlightenment by way of definitions or otherwise that may be afforded by the written
description contained in the applicant's specification. In re Morris, 127 F.3d 1048, 1054, 44 USPQ2d 1023, 1027
(Fed. Cir. 1997). In this case, we are informed by the appellant's specification (page 1, lines 3-7) that the
appellant's invention relates to flexible joints "for rotating members generally and, more particularly, but not by way
of limitation," (emphasis added) to a joint for coupling a drive motor shaft to a lead screw in a linear positioning
device. The appellant's specification does not limit the term "rotating member" to any particular type of rotating
element. Accordingly, we interpret "rotating member" as used in the claims as an element which rotates.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007