Appeal No. 2002-1620 Page 10
Application No. 09/504,416
Gautier discloses a master cylinder having a body 4 pierced with a bore 5
closed on a first side by an end 6 and on a second side by a piston 7. The piston 7
slides in the bore 5 to delimit a pressure chamber 8. The pressure chamber 8 is
connected by a pressure pipe 12 to at least one brake motor through an outlet 11
therein. The chamber 8 and the pressure pipe 12 together delimit a working volume
filled with a hydraulic fluid. The working volume is partially delimited by a leak-off
device 19 which is responsive to an impact to selectively allow hydraulic fluid to leak off
toward the outside of the working volume. Gautier teaches (column 2, lines 46-48) that
it is advantageous for the closure piece of the leak-off device to be urged into a position
of rest by a spring 20, in which position it fulfils its closure function as shown in Figures
2, 3 and 4.
In the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103, the examiner determined (final rejection,
p. 3) that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the
invention was made to have included a spring in the housing of Bauer as taught by
Gautier in order to prevent operation of the device in a non-collision situation.
The appellants argue that the applied prior art does not suggest the claimed
subject matter. We agree.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007