Appeal No. 2004-0191 Page 6
Application No. 09/072,241
Hoar discloses a propelled loader for raising a load from a first ground-level
position to a second raised position. It utilizes a linkage means comprising first,
second, third and fourth arm pivots, with the first and fourth arm pivots forming a first
diagonal line segment therebetween and the second and third forming a second
diagonal line segment therebetween, as is explained by the examiner on page 5 of the
Answer. The appellant has not contended that the Hoar machine fails to operate in the
manner recited in the first four steps of independent method claim 21. The argument
advanced by the appellant in opposition to the examiner’s rejection focuses on the final
two steps recited in the claim, which read as follows:
moving said first pivotal arm about said first arm pivot and said
second pivotal arm about said third arm pivot to vertically raise said load
from said first ground-level position to said raised unloading position; and
horizontally shifting said load support responsive to and throughout
said moving step in a direction corresponding to the direction of horizontal
displacement between said load and said mobile base.
As we understand the appellant’s argument, it is that Hoar does not disclose or
teach the step of horizontally shifting the load support in the direction of horizontal
displacement “throughout the load lifting process” because in the Hoar operation the
second pivot (at the upper end of link 28) and the proximal portion of arms 30 shift
horizontally backwards in the initial stages of operation with respect to the first pivot (at
the lower end of link 28) before moving in the direction of horizontal displacement
between the load and the mobile base (see Brief, pages 7 and 8). In support of this
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007