Appeal No. 2002-0911 Page 10
Application No. 09/272,115
Turning next to the examiner’s rejection of claims 5, 6 and 9 as being anticipated
by Walker, we note that the hoist line drum 48 and hoist line 46 work in conjunction with
the hydraulic boom hoist cylinders 34 and boom pendants 42, which move the mast
and hence adjust the position of the boom 26, to lift and lower components, such as the
crawlers 24, for example, into position for connection on the crane. Appellants argue
on page 15 of the brief that the winch (hoist line drum 48) is neither “self-contained”
with the boom base section (boom butt 30) nor “bodily movable with” the base section.
For the following reasons, we do not agree.
First, the hoist line drum 48, hoist line 46, hoist line cylinders 34 and boom
pendants 42 are all mounted and fully contained on the crane, which is all that claim 5
requires. Second, when the crane is rotated on its turntable or driven using its crawlers
24 along the ground, the hoist line drum 48, hoist line 46, hoist line cylinders 34 and
boom pendants 42 are all capable of being moved as a unit with the boom butt 30 and
are thus “bodily movable with” the boom butt (boom base section), as called for in
claim 5.
Accordingly, appellants’ arguments are unpersuasive of any error on the part of
the examiner in determining that claim 5 is anticipated by Walker. Thus, we shall
2 (...continued)
1565, 1576, 18 USPQ2d 1001, 1010 (Fed. Cir. 1991). It is not necessary that the reference teach what
the subject application teaches, but only that the claim read on something disclosed in the reference, i.e.,
that all of the limitations in the claim be found in or fully met by the reference. Kalman v. Kimberly Clark
Corp., 713 F.2d 760, 772, 218 USPQ 781, 789 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 465 U.S. 1026 (1984).
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007