Appeal No. 1998-0331
Application No. 08/297,257
space S, loading the bearings 44 prior to machining. Id. at
ll. 36-56.
In rejecting claims 1 and 10 as being unpatentable over
Acme in view of DT '799 and Burka, the examiner asserts that:
It would have been obvious . . . to
incorporate the Acme device with the first
and second spindle carrier bearings each
having a set of the DT '799 tapered roller
bearings disposed in the headstock, as taught
by DT '799, and the Burka spindle bearing
loading means for applying a force on the
first and second set of roller bearings to
minimize lateral movement of the bearings
disposed in the stepped portions of the
upright inner surface, as taught by Burka, in
order to reduce the shaft axial skidding and
to allow more precise and reproducible
machining of the workpiece.
Final rejection, p. 3.
The appellants do not challenge the examiner's
determination that Fig. 1 of the DT '799 reference shows
tapered roller bearings supporting the right-hand end of
spindle 1. However, the appellants correctly point out that
the specification of the DT '799 reference makes it clear that
the bearings rotatably support the spindle 1 of a milling
machine, not the spindle carriage of a multiple spindle bar
-9-
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007