Appeal No. 2006-0554
Application 10/065,541
When the additional teachings of Nakano are applied as
argued by the examiner, the alternative requirement of reducing
the cogging torque of the starter motor is clearly met as well
because Nakano further reduces known vibration problems, such
as those caused by cogging as illustrated in the prior art at
column 1 of Nakano, by inclining or otherwise skewing the bound-
ary lines between the adjacent permanent magnets as illustrated
in figures 4B and 4C. Thus, the features of dependent claims 2
and 3 as well as claim 4 are clearly taught by the obvious
combination. The examiner addresses appellants’ arguments as
to claim 6 at page 8 of the Answer.
Lastly, as to the separate rejection of dependent
claims 9 and 11 as being obvious over Shiga in view of Nakano,
further in view of Nishikawa, appellants only argue the
difference in problems of the applied prior art versus the
problems addressed by appellants, an overriding theme throughout
the Brief, which we have addressed earlier in this opinion.
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007