Appeal 2006-2849
Application 10/310,200
nut 17 is anchored midway between opposite ends. Adjacent the wing nut is
a hexagonal nut 17’ also anchored to the threaded shaft whereby to provide a
wrenchhold when needed” (Fox, col. 2, ll. 43-49; fig. 2). “In operation when
the lock chock assembly is to be installed, the wing nut 17 is backed off by
rotation in a withdrawal direction for the blockers 14 and 15 until there is an
abundance of room between respective flat sections 19 of the blocker 14 and
35 of the blocker 15” (Fox, col. 3, ll. 30-34). “Once the chocks are in proper
position, the wing nut 17 is rotated in the opposite direction together with
the threaded shaft 16 so as to extend both blockers 14 and 15 until they
engage the corresponding wheels 11 and 12” (Fox, col. 3, ll. 36-40).
Reilly discloses an orthodontic screw-type biasing device (Reilly,
col. 1, ll. 10-11). The device includes an exteriorly threaded actuator screw
(1) having an engagement spindle (3) with holes (4) therein for engagement
by an actuator such as a rod or pin-shaped actuator (Reilly, col. 2, ll. 8-12).
The portions of the screw on opposite sides of the spindle are oppositely
threaded with respect to each other (Reilly, col. 2, ll. 12-15). Turning the
spindle rotates the oppositely threaded screw portions to apply a spreading
action in a patient’s mouth (Reilly, col. 3, l. 67 – col. 4, l. 2). The ends of
the screw are screwed into a threaded portion (6) of a housing (2) and are
deformed to prevent them from inadvertently disengaging from the threaded
portion (Reilly, col. 2, ll. 15-34).
The Appellant argues that Reilly cannot be relied upon as prior art
because it is nonanalogous art (Br. 7; Reply Br. 2).1,2
1 The pages of the Reply Brief are not numbered. The page we refer to as1
page 2 is the second page.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013