Appeal No. 1999-1499
Application No. 08/764,736
The examiner argues (answer, page 8) that
Dutkiewicz et al clearly states that the retainer 10
can be permanently secured to the bearing cups and
additionally functions to limit the amount by which
the bearing cups may rotate relative to the yoke
following installation therein. Therefore, if the
retainer is a permanent part of the assembly, then
the retainer, the bearing cups, and the yoke become
an integral functioning member/assembly. Further
noting that integral does not require the elements
to be one homogenous piece, then element 10c meets
the limitation of a lip extending outwardly of the
mating surfaces, and between the arm[s] to overlay a
top portion of the shoulder.
We do not share the examiner's view in this matter. In
that regard, it is clear to us that the retainer 10 of
Dutkiewicz may be a permanent part of cross 12 and bearing
cups 13, and not of yoke 20 as the examiner would have us
believe. While it is true that the assembly of cross 12,
bearing cups 13 and retainer 10 with lip 10c is to be inserted
between arms 20a of yoke 20, appellants' claim 17 expressly
requires that "said second yoke includes a lip which extends
radially inwardly" (emphasis ours). We must, therefore, agree
with the appellants when they argue (reply brief, page 3) that
the "retainer 10, and its portions 10[c], are not part of the
yoke." We fail to perceive any teaching, suggestion or
incentive in either Borg-Warner or Dutkiewicz which would have
17
Page: Previous 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007