Appeal No. 2004-1227
Application No. 09/940,311
Rather than reiterate the respective positions advocated by
the appellants and by the examiner concerning this rejection, we
refer to the brief and reply brief and to the answer for a
complete exposition thereof.
OPINION
The above-noted rejection cannot be sustained for the
reasons set forth below.
It is the examiner’s conclusion that
it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in
the art at the time the invention was made to modify
the apparatus of Figures 20 and 21 in view of the
teachings of Tada . . . to include guide links having
a pair of pin accommodating holes therein so as to
improve structural strength and integrity of said chain
in at least the longitudinal direction of said chain
[answer, pages 3 and 4].
While Tada indeed shows guide links of the type here claimed
which are press fit on connecting pins, the sole purpose taught
by patentee for these guide links is “to maintain the chain on
the sprocket” (column 2, line 43). For the reasons fully
explained by the appellants in their Brief, the double-sided
meshing type silent chain shown in Figures 20 and 21 of the
subject application does not require guide links for the purpose
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007