Appeal No. 2005-0948 Page 9
Application No. 09/922,938
In our view, the claimed slider block (i.e., a slider block having both a non-circular
locking shaft disposed through a bore therein and a locking piston vertically slidably
disposed therein, wherein rotation of the locking shaft lifts the locking piston (and the
locking plate mounted thereto) while pressing the slider block so as to clamp the housing
to a bedway between the slider block and the locking plate) is not readable on Clay's
support block 12 and cam 13. In that regard, it is our opinion that one skilled in the art
would consider only Clay's support block 12 to be a slider block. One skilled in the art
would not have considered Clay's cam 13 (which rotates with respect to support block 12
and is supported thereon by bearings 15 resting on two semi-cylindrical concave support
surfaces 17) together with the support block 12 to be a slider block. In any event, the
feature of claim 20 that upon rotation of the locking shaft the locking piston and the
locking plate mounted thereto are lifted while pressing the slider block so as to clamp the
housing to a bedway between the slider block and the locking plate is not present in Clay
since rotation of the drive shaft 18 does not result in the pressing of support block 12 so
as to clamp the housing to a bedway between the support block 12 and the clamping
plate 22. As shown in Figure 4 of Clay, the rails 50 of the bedway are clamped between
the clamping plate 22 and ledges 14 formed on the base 35 of the banjo.
For the reasons set forth above claim 20 is not anticipated by Clay. Accordingly,
the decision of the examiner to reject claim 20 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) is reversed.
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007