Ex Parte HIGHTOWER et al - Page 2




              Appeal No. 2002-1984                                                                  Page 2                
              Application No. 09/438,909                                                                                  


                     The following rejection is before us for review.                                                     
                     Claims 1-40 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as being anticipated by                          
              Hanley1.                                                                                                    
                     Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and                        
              the appellants regarding the above-noted rejection, we make reference to the answer                         
              (Paper No. 14) for the examiner's complete reasoning in support of the rejection and to                     
              the brief and reply brief (Paper Nos. 13 and 15) for the appellants’ arguments                              
              thereagainst.                                                                                               
                                                       OPINION                                                            
                     In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given careful consideration to                      
              the appellants’ specification and claims2, to the applied Hanley patent, and to the                         
              respective positions articulated by the appellants and the examiner.  As a consequence                      
              of our review, we make the determinations which follow.                                                     
                                           Claims 1, 2, 7, 11, 12, 19 and 20                                              
                     Hanley discloses an actuator for actuating a damper or valve in an HVAC                              
              installation, the actuator comprising a drive motor 28, an output coupler 14 operatively                    
              coupled to a damper (not shown) and driven, through a motor drive pinion 26 and gear                        
              train 24, by the motor 28, a brake device including a flywheel 68 coupled to and driven                     


                     1 U.S. Patent No. 5,986,369, issued November 16, 1999 to Mark G. Hanley et al.                       
                     2 We note that “said output coupling” and “said solenoid activation element” in claim 21 and “said   
              solenoid activation element” in claim 31 lack clear antecedent basis.  Upon return of this application to the
              Technology Center, the examiner and appellant should take appropriate steps to remedy this informality.     





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007