Appeal No. 2002-1704
Application No. 09/240,313
a higher torque in the tightening direction than in the loosening
direction. Independent claims 14 and 22 are representative of
the subject matter on appeal and a copy of those claims can be
found in Exhibit 1 of appellant's brief.
The prior art references of record relied upon by the
examiner in rejecting the appealed claims are:
Dmitroff 2,685,812 Aug. 10, 1954
Grimm et al. (Grimm) 3,354,757 Nov. 28, 1967
Kesselman 5,228,250 Jul. 20, 1993
Whittle 5,449,260 Sep. 12, 1995
Grünbichler 5,713,705 Feb. 3, 1998
Claims 14, 18 and 22 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b)
as being anticipated by Whittle.
Claims 17 and 18 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
being unpatentable over Whittle.
Claims 14, 17, 18 and 22 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as being unpatentable over Dmitroff in view of Whittle.
Claims 14 through 18 and 22 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as being unpatentable over Grimm in view of Whittle.
22
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007