Appeal 2006-2838
Application 10/257,576
ANALYSIS
Although Thompson describes element 10 as a “spring ring or washer
member,” in practice, the flat washer member 10 shown in Thompson is not
elastically deformable as the nut 4 is tightened on the bolt 3. Instead, when the nut
4 is tightened on the bolt 3, Thompson’s rectangular plate 5, formed of a spring
material, deforms as it bulges outwardly. This deformation causes the washer
member 10 to move along a longitudinal axis of the bolt 3 toward the nut 4 so that
the ratchet teeth 13 and 14 engage one another. Contrary to the Examiner’s
reading of Thompson (Answer 11), we do not find Thompson’s description to
indicate that the washer member 10 bulges towards the nut 4 along with the
bulging rectangular plate 5. If the washer member 10 were to bulge towards the
nut, as suggested by the Examiner, then the teeth 13 on the washer would not
properly engage the teeth 14 on the nut. As such, Thompson does not disclose a
washer that is resiliently deformable when it is subjected to a joint preloading
force. Accordingly, claims 39 and 75, and their respective dependent claims 40,
45, 47, 49, 51-53, 61, 62, 66, 67, 69, 76-79, and 82, are not anticipated by
Thompson.
The Examiner did not rely upon McCoy or Walton for the teaching of a
washer that is resiliently deformable. Further, we find that neither of these
references cures the deficiency of Thompson. Accordingly, claims 41-44, 46, 48,
50, 60, 64, 65, 68, 70, 73, 74, and 80 are not rendered obvious by Thompson in
combination with McCoy. Further, claims 54 and 57 are not rendered obvious by
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013