Appeal No. 2004-2291 Page 7
Application No. 10/318,506
For the reasons set forth above, claims 21 and 23 are not anticipated by
Mutaguchi. Therefore, the decision of the examiner to reject claims 21 and 23, and
claims 22 and 24 dependent thereon, under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) is reversed.
Independent claims 25 and 26 read as follows:
25. Eddy current braking apparatus for a rail mounted car, the apparatus
comprising:
a car moveable along at least one rail;
magnet means, disposed on the car, for providing a magnetic flux, said
magnet means consisting of a single array of permanent magnets; and
conductive means disposed in a curvilinear pattern exterior the car and on
opposite sides of the car, for engaging the magnetic flux and causing movement
of the car along the rail to produce eddy currents in the conductive means
resulting in a braking force between the magnet means and the conductive
means.
26. Eddy current braking apparatus for a rail mounted car, the apparatus
comprising:
a car moveable along at least one rail;
magnet means, disposed in a curvilinear pattern exterior to the car and on
opposite sides of the car, for providing a magnetic flux, said magnet means
consisting of a single array of permanent magnets; [and]
conductive means, disposed on the car, for engaging the magnetic flux
and causing movement of the car along the rail to produce eddy currents in the
conductive means resulting in a braking force between the magnet means and
the conductive means.
The appellants argue (brief, pp. 6-7; reply brief, pp. 4-5) that Mutaguchi does not
disclose the utilization of magnet means or conductive means disposed on opposite
sides of the car. The examiner's response (answer, p. 10) to this argument is that
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007