Appeal 2006-2534
Application 10/789,411
example, Figure 4 of Carlson showing the inner diameter of washer 13 in
contact with the outer diameter of shaft 10 on the left side while the inner
diameter of the washer on the right side of it digs into the shaft (col. 2, l. 51
through col. 3, l. 6). Therefore, according the claims their broadest
reasonable interpretation without broadening the claims beyond their correct
scope and considering the teachings of the prior art as a whole, we remain of
the opinion that Carlson anticipates claims 1 and 15.
In conclusion, based on the foregoing discussion, we have granted
Appellants’ request to the extent that we have reconsidered our decision, but
we deny Appellants’ request to make any change therein.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a)(1)(iv).
DENIED
KIS
HENRY M. FEIEREISEN, L.L.C.
350 FIFTH AVENUE
SUITE 4714
NEW YORK, NY 10118
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6
Last modified: September 9, 2013