Appeal No. 2006-0373 Παγε 4
Application No. 10/181,625
3c, the rotor and stator of the steering wheel actuator 9 are not integrated with the
braking device. Instead, a separate actuating device 29, in the form of a lifting
electromagnet 37 for lifting a cylindrical pin 31, is used to clamp the outer race 40 to the
steering column to block the steering wheel. A copy of the claims under appeal is set
forth in the appendix to the appellants' brief.
The Rejection
Claims 24-27 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph, because,
according to the examiner, the specification, while being enabling for the two
embodiments, does not reasonably provide enablement for a combination of both. It is
thus the examiner's position that the specification does not enable any person skilled in
the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make the
invention commensurate in scope with these claims.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and
the appellants regarding the above-noted rejection, we make reference to the answer
(mailed February 25, 2005) for the examiner's complete reasoning in support of the
rejection, and to the brief (filed December 6, 2004) for the appellants' arguments
thereagainst.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007