Appeal No. 1998-2297
Application 08/353,622
(CCPA 1971). The applied prior art does not mention power
tools, and the appellant’s specification discloses only rotary
speeds of about 9,000 to about 13,000 revolutions per minute
(specification, page 3, lines 1-2; page 4, lines 14-15).
Thus, we interpret “high speed” in the appellant’s claim 29 as
meaning that the rotary speed is on the order of about 9,000
to about 13,000 revolutions per minute.
The examiner argues (answer, page 4) that “it has been
held that broadly providing a mechanical or automatic means to
replace manual activity which has accomplished the same result
involves only route in [sic, routine] skill in the art. In re
Venner, 120 USPQ 192.”
In In re Venner, 262 F.2d 91, 94, 120 USPQ 192, 194 (CCPA
1958), the appellants argued that “the basis for allowance of
the appealed claims [to an apparatus for molding trunk pistons
of aluminum and magnesium alloys] resides in the combination
of the old permanent-mold structures together with a timer and
solenoid which automatically actuates the known pressure valve
system to release the inner core after a predetermined time
-5-5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007