Appeal 2006-1263
Application 10/173,259
argument is not commensurate with the scope of the claims. The claims
recite “bushings fixed therein to define air injection passages” (claim 1, line
6), “A busing for fixing in air injection holes’ (claim 11, line 1), and
“bushings . . . being fitted in one of said air injection holes” (claim 14, lines
3-4). Appellants’ claims do not require that the bushings are removable.
The specification broadly defines bushings as made by precision
casting and dimensioned to the size of the air injection holes (specification at
6). The dictionary defines bushings as: “1an insulating liner in an opening
through which conductors pass,” as “a cylindrical metal lining used to
reduce friction,” (WordNet 2.1. Princeton University) and “a fixed or
removable cylindrical lining used to constrain, guide, or reduce friction,”
(The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language (4th ed. 2000)).
The limitation “removable” has not been claimed and the term “bushing” has
not been defined to mean removable.
In any case, Monk discloses a device having an inlet that may be
“formed integrally in a combustion chamber or as a separate member which
can be joined to the combustion chamber by welding” (Column 1, lines
18-20). In this regard we note that the device of Monk is removable to the
extent that the device disclosed on page 6 of Appellants’ disclosure depicts a
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013