Appeal No. 1998-1263
Application No. 08/351,993
would readily comprehend the Du Bois patent as teaching a single
piston 84 and sealing ring 88 in annular chamber 80 (Figs. 2 and
3) contacting pressure plate 124, and not as a disclosure of a
plurality of pressure application members as required by
appellant's independent claims 1 and 25. For these reasons, the
seventh rejection cannot be sustained.
The eighth rejection
We do not sustain the rejection of claims 2 through 6, 8
through 17, 21, and 22 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Du Bois.
This rejection concerns claims dependent from independent
claim 1, as well as independent claim 10 and dependent claims
thereof. We determined, supra, that claim 1 was not anticipated
by Du Bois.
In this obviousness rejection, only the Du Bois patent is
applied. By itself, and with an absence of any indication of a
material for the pressure plate 124, it does not appear to us
that the Du Bois teaching of an airplane wheel disk brake would
15
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007