Appeal 2006-3100
Application 10/662,547
1 Lee US 4,742,898 May 10, 1988
2 DeMolina US 6,352,145 B1 Mar. 5, 2002
3 In regard to the rejection of claims 7 to 11, it is the Examiner’s
4 contention that DeMolina discloses the invention as claimed except that
5 DeMolina does not disclose a plurality of holes in helical spiral formation
6 which are sequentially closed to progressive close a third flow path. The
7 Examiner relies on Lee and Dressell for teaching various aspects of the
8 progressive closing of the third flow path.
9 Appellant contends that none of the references cited discloses or
10 suggests a sleeve operable to progressively close the third flow path by
11 sequentially covering the plurality of holes in the piston rod assembly and
12 being operable to simultaneously cover all of the plurality of holes as
13 required by claim 1.
14 In regard to the rejection of claims 12 to 15 and 18, it is the
15 Examiner’s opinion that DeMolina discloses the invention as claimed except
16 that DeMolina does not disclose the third passageway comprised of a single
17 hole and groove with a depth of the groove decreasing from the hole to a
18 terminal end and the sleeve simultaneously covering the hole and groove to
19 fully close the third flow path. The Examiner relies on Dressell and
20 Schupner for disclosing helical grooves with varying depth with holes which
21 open into them.
22 Appellant contends that neither Dressell nor Schupner discloses a
23 sleeve operable to progressively close the third flow path by progressively
24 covering the groove from the hole to the terminal end.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013