Appeal No. 1998-3353
Application 08/692,711
Instead, as noted in the examiner’s analysis of the
Herman patent (see, for example, page 3 of the answer),
Herman discloses a two-part motion-transmitting assembly
for transmitting the rotation of the selector member 90
to a selected pawl in the ratchet mechanism. Herman’s
two-part
assembly comprises what is described in Herman’s
specification as a “pin” 95 and an L-shaped lever 80.
Herman’s pin 95 is mounted on the rotatable selector
member 90 for engaging the L-shaped lever 80 which is
positioned between the pawls to contact a selected pawl
and thereby disengage the selected pawl from the ratchet
gear in the ratchet mechanism. The examiner nevertheless
concludes, that each of the applied secondary references
(namely Froeschl and Gantz) would have made it obvious to
“form the actuator pin [95] and lever [80] of Herman et
al as a pin in direct engagement with the pawls . . .”
(answer, page 3). We cannot agree.
In rejecting claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103, the
examiner bears the initial burden of presenting a prima
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007