The opinion in support of the decision being entered today was not written for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________
Ex parte Richard F. Post
____________
Appeal No. 2005-2042
Application No. 09/946,298
____________
ON BRIEF
____________
Before HAIRSTON, BARRY, and BLANKENSHIP, Administrative Patent Judges.
BARRY, Administrative Patent Judge.
A patent examiner rejected claims 11 and 12.1 The appellant appeals therefrom
under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a). We affirm-in-part.
I. BACKGROUND
The invention at issue on appeal concerns bearings used to support and stabilize
a rotor. An armature and a field winding are the primary elements of motors. In low
power applications, the armature is the rotor part of the motor, while the field winding is
1In contrast to claims 11 and 12, the examiner explains, "Claims 13, 14, 15 and
16 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be
allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim
and any intervening claims." (Examiner's Answer at 6.)
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007