Appeal 2007-0550
Application 10.763,714
shaft coupling 10. (Attinger 4.) Wheels 2 are connected to one another by
wheel-set shaft 3, which is pivoted in wheel bearings 4 (Attinger 4).
The brake device comprises a disk brake 11 arranged on hollow shaft
7 and brake shoes 12 of a disk-brake caliper 14 acting upon the disk brake
11. The disk-brake caliper is rigidly connected via a carrier cantilever 15 to
transmission housing 5 and has fixed thereon a brake cylinder 16 for
activating disk-brake caliper 14. (Attinger 5.) The hollow shafts 7 and 9 are
not fixed with respect to one another, "but allow to a limited extent a relative
motion of the wheel set shaft" (Attinger 3). With such an arrangement,
Attinger achieves a brake arrangement which is not influenced by the motion
of the wheel-set shaft, thereby improving the brake effect. Id. In other
words, neither disk brake 11 nor disk-brake caliper 14 is influenced by the
motion of wheel-set shaft 3. Id. Consequently, problematic relative motion
between these two parts is preferably avoided (Attinger 2).
DISUSSION
Appellants' position with respect to the rejections has shifted from the
Appeal Brief to the Reply Brief, after receiving a copy of the translation of
Attinger from the Examiner with the first Answer and learning that hollow
shaft 7, hollow shaft 9 and wheel-set shaft 3 are all mounted for rotation, at
least to a limited extent (Attinger 3), with respect to one another and with
respect to the transmission housing 5. Our decision thus addresses
Appellants' position as set forth in the Reply Brief. We do not address
Appellants' arguments directed to the "First Interpretation of Attinger"
(Reply Br. 3) and "Third Interpretation of Attinger" (Reply Br. 5-6), because
we do not adopt the reading of Appellants' claims on Attinger in accordance
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013