Ex Parte Larson et al - Page 2




              Appeal No. 2006-0042                                                                 Παγε 2                
              Application No. 10/411,438                                                                                 



                                                    BACKGROUND                                                           
                     The appellants' invention relates to a vehicle steering assembly, and more                          
              particularly, to a joint formed between a steering knuckle and a tie rod end                               
              (specification, p. 1).  A copy of the claims under appeal is set forth in the appendix to                  
              the appellants' brief.                                                                                     


                     The prior art references of record relied upon by the examiner in rejecting the                     
              appealed claims are:                                                                                       
              Latzen    2,771,300    Nov. 20, 1956                                                                       
              McAfee    4,162,859    July  31, 1979                                                                      
              Schmidt     US 2002/0012567 A1   Jan. 31, 2002                                                             


                     Claims 1 to 12 and 19 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being                                 
              unpatentable over Latzen in view of Schmidt.                                                               


                     Claims 13 to 18 and 20 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being                                
              unpatentable over Latzen in view of Schmidt and McAfee.                                                    


                     Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and                       
              the appellants regarding the above-noted rejections, we make reference to the answer                       
              (mailed May 6, 2005) for the examiner's complete reasoning in support of the rejections,                   







Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007