Appeal No. 2004-0413
Application No. 09/752,301
Mager pertains to an electric motor operated vehicle
comprising, inter alia, four wheels, each wheel having an electric
hub motor for directly driving that wheel. As expressly stated by
Mager at column 2, lines 50-54, a benefit of this type of drive is
that “[b]y mounting the drive motors directly on the traction wheel
assemblies, power losses through use of interconnecting drive
arrangements are avoided.”
Looking at Yuki in more detail, we note that the electric
motor 30 is drivingly connected to the wheelbarrow wheel 23 through
a power train that includes a number of gears. More particularly,
and with reference to Yuki’s schematic Figure 4, motor 30 is
drivingly connected to wheel axle 24 by a drive train that includes
first and second gears 38 and 40, one-way clutch 41, third and
fourth gears 42 and 44, fifth and sixth gears 45 and 47, and a
sprocket and chain set 48-50. Keeping in mind that the law
presumes skill on the part of the artisan rather than the converse
(In re Sovish, 769 F.2d 738, 743, 226 USPQ 771, 774 (Fed. Cir.
1985)), it is our view that one of ordinary skill in the art would
have been motivated to substitute a direct drive electric hub motor
arrangement like that of Mager for the rather complex and
cumbersome drive arrangement of Yuki merely for the purpose of
streamlining and simplifying Yuki’s wheelbarrow wheel drive
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007