Appeal No. 2006-1430
Application No. 10/005,484
attached to a piston 70. Air pressure supplied to the lower surface 70b of the
piston 70 via connecting pressure tube 75 moves valve element 65 to the
open position. Spring 66 resists movement of valve element 65 to the open
position and returns valve element 65 to the closed position when air
pressure on piston 70 is reduced or eliminated. Col. 3, ll. 30-48 and 62-71.
A threaded shaft 80 and rotatable wheel 82 provide an adjustable stop to
adjust the extent of movement of piston 70 and thus the extent of the
opening of valve element 65 (col. 3, l. 74 to col. 4, l. 5).
The Examiner finds that Shank discloses all the features of
independent claims 24 and 45 except the plunger, piston and sleeve being
constructed and arranged to provide all metering positions from a fully
closed position to a fully open position (Answer 7). The Examiner’s
position appears to be that it would have been obvious to provide adjustment
means for adjusting the extent of movement of Shank’s valve stem 45, as
taught by Schmidt or Evans, to regulate the flow of media through the valve
(Answer 7-8 and 16).
Appellants’ argument is the same with respect to each of the claims
rejected as being unpatentable over Shank in view of Schmidt or Evans.
Specifically, Appellants argue that the applied references provide no
suggestion to combine the threaded adjustment approach of Schmidt (or
Evans) with the on/off valve of Shank and that, even if combined, the
resulting valve would still not be constructed and arranged to provide all
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013