Appeal No. 1999-1818 Page 3
Application No. 08/586,806
Reference is made to the brief and reply brief (Paper Nos. 19 and 21 ) and the answer
(Paper No. 20) for the respective positions of the appellants and the examiner with regard to
the merits of these rejections.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given careful consideration to the
appellants' specification and claims , to the applied prior art references, and to the respective2
positions articulated by the appellants and the examiner. As a consequence of our review, we
make the determinations which follow.
Independent claims 1 and 7 read as follows:
1. A push rod comprising a rod body, and a steel ball bonded to bond sections of
at least one end of the rod body by an electric resistance welding, wherein said rod body is
formed from an aluminum alloy, and said bond sections of said rod body and said steel ball
have mechanical engagement portions formed by said electric resistance welding wherein said
mechanical engagement portions include biting in portions of the rod body into the steel ball
and an aluminum layer formed on a surface of the steel ball by a liquid phase generated from
the rod body during welding.
7. A process for producing a push rod, comprising the steps of:
bringing one end face of a rod body into pressure contact with a steel ball;
2We note that the preambles of claims 4 and 5, which are directed only to a push rod, appear to be
inconsistent with the recitations of these claims. Specifically, the limitation in claim 4 that the push rod is
"disposed between a cam shaft and a rocker arm in an internal combustion engine" indicates the claim is directed to
an internal combustion engine. Similarly, the limitation in claim 5 that the push rod is "disposed between a pressure
plate and a clutch-disengaging drive source in a friction clutch" indicates the claim is directed to a friction clutch.
While these informalities do not, in our opinion, render the scope of the claims indefinite, they are deserving of
correction in the event of further prosecution before the examiner.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007