Appeal No. 2005-0562
Application 09/824,276
of having selected the reverse and low speed rail position (i.e.,
via tactile feedback) and to resiliently urge the transmission
out of this position upon release of the shift lever by the
operator. Thus, it appears that plunger member (144) of Reynolds
is not a “switch” and clearly does not “provide an indication to
a splitter mechanism of when said interlock is in a predetermined
position,” as urged by the examiner.
As for the examiner’s assertions on page 3 of the answer, we
share appellants’ views in the rely brief that there is
absolutely no reason to incorporate the groove or recess (122)
and sensing member (138) of Jones into either the bushing (114)
or the plunger (144) of Reynolds’ transmission. At best, it
appears from a collective evaluation of the applied patents that
it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at
the time of appellants’ invention to incorporate an auxiliary
shift rail like that seen at (110) of Jones into the transmission
of Reynolds at a position on the shift lever above bushing (114),
shift rails (96, 98) and control shaft (100), as generally shown
in Figures 1 and 2 of Jones wherein the auxiliary shift rail
(110) cooperating with the sensor (132) is located on the shift
lever (102) at a position above shift rails (46, 48 and 50).
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007