Appeal No. 2000-2025
Application 08/953,878
view of Hyman or Fischer.
Rejection (1)
The AAPA, in particular Heth, discloses a conditioner
roll having a core 37 with flutes 38, which are preferably
castings, thereon, the flutes being secured to core 37 “by
means of bolts 39 or the like threaded or otherwise secured in
the roll 37" (col. 2, line 72, to col. 3, line 1). As shown
in Figs. 6 and 7 (and described at page 1, lines 15 to 17 of
appellant’s specification), the bolts 39 are screwed into
threaded holes in the core 37; no nuts are shown. The basis
of the rejection, as stated on pages 5 to 6 of the answer, is:
In view of Harris and Crigger, one having ordinary
skill in the art would have found it obvious to modify
AAPA by substituting a bolt and nut arrangement for the
bolt (39), wherein the bolt has ribs thereon which bite
into either of the core and fluter [sic], in order to
provide for a more secure and easily made connection
between the fluter [sic] and the core. It is appreciated
that Harris fails to provide ribs directly on the bolt.
However, in light of Crigger’s teaching of providing ribs
directly on [a] threaded member, and in view of the
holding that forming in one piece an article which has
formerly been formed in two pieces and put together
involves only routine skill in the art, Howard v. Detroit
Stove Works, 150 U.S. 164 (1893), one would have readily
appreciated that the bushing and bolt of Harris could be
formed as a monolithic member, which would serve to
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007