Appeal No. 2002-0342 Page 6
Application No. 09/295,399
with “second partial guide bands made of soft iron,” with the total length of the soft iron
“partial guide bands” being 5% to 50% of the total length of said drive band,” as
required by claim 1. We are not persuaded otherwise by the examiner’s reference to
page 3, line 38, of the British reference, where the term “driving band” is used to refer to
the alternating rings of porous metal and copper, for the reasons explained above
regarding the defintion of “guide band” that in our view must be applied here.
The German patent does disclose a “guide band,” as defined by the appellants.
It comprises a single first partial guide band of copper and a single second partial guide
band of low carbon steel. This reference teaches that the copper partial guide band,
which is forward of the low carbon steel partial guide band, provides lubrication for the
latter in the same manner as the appellants’ invention. However, there are only two
partial guide bands, and although not so stated in the text it is clear from Figure 1 of the
drawings that the total length of the second partial guide band clearly exceeds 50% of
the total length of the guide band, and therefore does not meet the requirements of
claim 1.
Based upon the above findings, it is our conclusion that the combined teachings
of the British specification and the German patent fail to establish a prima facie case of
obviousness with regard to the subject matter recited in claim 1, and we will not sustain
the rejection of claim 1 or, it follows, of claim 4 and 6, which depend from claim 1 and
were rejected on the same basis.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007