Ex Parte ONO et al - Page 2




          Appeal No. 2003-0190                                                        
          Application No. 08/515,964                                                  


          camshaft position and the engine output shaft.  The timing sensor           
          is mounted on the bearing cap of the camshaft with the timing               
          sensor and bearing cap extending through an opening in a cam                
          cover, thereby permitting access to the timing sensor without               
          removing the cam cover.                                                     
               Claim 1 is illustrative of the invention and reads as                  
          follows:                                                                    
               1.  A timing arrangement for an internal combustion engine             
          having an engine component in which a camshaft is rotatably                 
          journalled, said camshaft being journalled at least in part by a            
          bearing cap affixed to said engine component, and a timing sensor           
          carried by said bearing cap and cooperating with said camshaft              
          for providing a signal indicative of the timing relationship of             
          said engine.                                                                
               The Examiner relies on the following references:                       
          Klauber et al. (Klauber)     5,287,735       Feb. 22, 1994                  
          Takano         6,148,787                     Nov. 21, 2000                  
                         (Filed May 11, 1999)                                         
               Claims 1-11, all of the appealed claims, stand finally                 
          rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(f) and 35 U.S.C. § 102(g).                   
          Claims 1-11 stand further finally rejected under the judicially             
          created doctrine of obviousness-type double patenting as being              
          unpatentable over claims 1 and 6–9 of U.S. Patent No. 6,148,787             
          (Takano).  In addition, independent claim 1 stands finally                  
          rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over                
          Klauber.                                                                    

                                         -2–2                                           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007