Appeal No. 1999-2819
Application No. 08/631,952
103(a) over Field and Bosch, further in view of
Neuenschwander.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over
Field, Bosch and Neuenschwander, further in view of
Nilsson.
The respective positions of the examiner and the
appellant with regard to the propriety of these
rejections are set forth in the examiner’s answer (Paper
No. 14) and the appellant’s brief (Paper No. 12).
Appellant’s Invention
Appellant’s invention is adequately described at
pages 2 and 3 of the brief. As is evident from the
independent claims, the invention involves compressible
protrusions on the central opening of rotor laminations
to form a press fit between the laminations and a rotor
shaft.
Opinion
With respect to the rejection of claims 1, 2, 4, 6
and 7, appellant first argues that there is no suggestion
or motivation in the references or in the knowledge
generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art
to modify the synchronous motor system of Field with the
drive motor stator laminations of Bosch to meet the
claimed invention. Appellant states that Field discloses
the conventional prior art structure of providing a key
connection between a rotor shaft and a rotor lamination
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007