Appeal No. 2005-0948 Page 8
Application No. 09/922,938
banjo. The preferred banjo is hollow and forms a longitudinally extending passageway
82 in which the clamping mechanism can slide.
The appellants argue (brief, pp. 13-14) that claim 20 is not anticipated by Clay
because Clay does not teach a slider block having a bore. Rather, the appellants point
out that Clay provides a support block 12 on which a cam 13-15 is rotatably disposed
and that support block 12 does not include a bore for receiving a non-circular Iocking
shaft. As such, the appellants conclude that Clay does not anticipate the tool rest
recited in claim 20.
In response to this argument, the examiner asserts (answer, pp. 9-10) that:
The "slider block'' is viewed as the combination of elements 12 and 13 in Clay,
the bore is clearly shown between element 15 and 13 in figure 4. Whereas Clay
provided a slider block comprised of more than one piece, Appellant has chosen
a unitary construction. The Examiner notes that Appellant did not claim the slider
block to be of single, unitary construction.
In reply to the examiner's response, the appellants argue (reply brief, 3-4) that:
parts 13 and 12 cannot properly be considered a part of ''block'' because cam 13
is a part of the cam shaft and moves upward and downward in relation to the
support block 12 so that cam 13 and block 12 cannot be considered parts of a
(singular) support block. Thus, there is no anticipation of claim 20.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007