Appeal No. 2002-2272
Application 09/375,712
Independent claim 1 recites a shoulder compacting apparatus
comprising, inter alia, a ram capable of substantially horizontal
linear movement, at least one arm supported for movement relative
to the ram, a roller rotatably supported by the at least one arm
and a second linear actuator “operably connecting said ram and
said at least one arm” whereby the roller is actuated by the
linear actuator in substantially vertical movement.
Rossburger discloses a shoulder compacting apparatus towed
by a grader. The apparatus includes a pivotable frame 1 on the
rear end of the grader, hydraulic cylinders 18 for pivotally
raising and lowering the frame relative to the grader, a carriage
22 having tubes 23 and 24 slidable on the frame, a hydraulic
cylinder 32 for moving the carriage laterally on the frame, a
pivot arm beam 40 on the carriage, and a plurality of compacting
wheels 75 depending from the pivot arm beam.
In rejecting claim 1 as being anticipated by Rossburger (see
pages 4 and 5 in the answer), the examiner reads the limitations
in the claim pertaining to the ram, the arm, the roller and the
second linear actuator on Rossburger’s carriage tubes 23, 24,
pivot arm beam 40, wheels 75 and hydraulic cylinders 18,
respectively. Even if the tubes 23, 24, pivot arm beam 40 and
wheels 75 respectively embody a ram, arm and roller as recited in
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007