Appeal No. 2003-0131
Application 09/533,060
Attention is directed to the appellants’ main and reply
briefs (Paper Nos. 11 and 13) and to the examiner’s answer (Paper
No. 12) for the respective positions of the appellants and the
examiner regarding the merits of these rejections.2
DISCUSSION
Mueller, the examiner’s primary reference, discloses a
limited slip axle differential mechanism 10. As shown in Figure
1, this differential mechanism comprises, inter alia, a
differential carrier 12, an axle housing 14, a ring gear 34
(in meshing engagement with an output pinion 30), a rotatable
differential case 36, a sensor 200 connected to the carrier at
202 by threads or any other suitable means to detect the
rotational speed of the ring gear, and an alternate placement of
the sensor at 206.
2 In the final rejection, claims 6 through 9 also stood rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112,
second paragraph, as being indefinite. The examiner has withdrawn this rejection in view of the
amendment of claim 6 subsequent to final rejection (see the advisory action dated February 22,
2002, Paper No. 10).
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007