Appeal No. 2002-0816
Application No. 09/442,895 Page 19
carrier being bonded to the rotor 26 for the purpose of bonding
the two components together; ( see col. 5, lines 43-45).
Appellant asserts (brief, page 6) that “[t]hese claims call for
the magnetic carrier to be adhesively bonded to the rotor and
that the magnet carrier face that carries the adhesive is that
which faces the rotor so as to also affix the magnetic carrier to
the rotor. The Stokes reference admittedly shows the adhesive
bonding of permanent magnets to a shell but not to a face of the
shell nor does it show bonding of the shell to the rotating
element. Also the adhesive is utilized to bond a shell to the
outer surface of the magnets and hence, does not form a
protective coating.” From our review of Stokes we agree with
appellant that even though Stokes discloses preventing magnets
from releasing particles or chips during rotation of the rotor,
we find no suggestion of adhesively bonding the magnet carrier of
Shirakawa to the rotor. Although Knappe teaches making the
magnet carrier adjustable to allow alignment with the Hall
sensors (col. 3, line 67 through col. 4, line 3) we find no
teaching to attach the magnetic carrier of Shirakawa to the rotor
and find that if the magnetic carrier was bonded to the rotor,
two problems would result. The first is that the Hall sensors
would be out of alignment. The second is that Carrier teaches
that the extension 28A effects axial positioning of the FG magnet
Page: Previous 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007