Appeal No. 2003-0693
Application No. 09/006,248
(8) The § 103 rejection of claims 43-45
We do not sustain the § 103 rejection of claims 43-45 as being
unpatentable over Blatt ‘276 in view of Vachtsevanos and Kraft.
Claim 43 calls for, among other things, a base having a fluid
distributing internal manifold and a ball joint, with fluid
operably flowing from the manifold and internally through the ball
of the ball joint.
The cited references do not teach a ball joint having a ball
with fluid flowing through said ball. In particular, Vachtsevanos
does not teach a ball joint having control lines of any sort
passing through the ball of the joint. In Figures 1 and 2 of
Vachtsevanos the conductors 42-48 bypass the spherical rotor R and
are routed to the gripper 28 by means of breakout 32. Likewise, in
Blatt ‘276 (see, for example, Figure 1) the fluid lines 50 bypass
the ball joints that mount the booms 16 to the boom arm 14. As to
Kraft, the manipulation system thereof does not utilize ball
joints.
(9) The § 103 rejection of claim 46
We do not sustain the § 103 rejection of claim 46 as being
unpatentable over Blatt ‘276 in view of Hurlimann, Vachtsevanos,
Kraft, Blatt ‘566 and Giern.
19
Page: Previous 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007