Appeal 2007-1217
Application 10/219,135
1 Claim 1 reproduced below, is further illustrative of the claimed subject
2 matter:
3 1. A reversible ratcheting wrench pawl, the pawl comprising a rigid
4 body having a side with a plurality of teeth, said plurality of teeth including
5 a first teeth portion having a first center of curvature and a second teeth
6 portion having a second center of curvature located at a position different
7 from the first center of curvature, wherein the pawl has a first ratcheting
8 position, wherein the first teeth portion is completely engaged with a gear
9 wheel and the second teeth portion is disengaged with the gear wheel, and a
10 second ratcheting position wherein the second teeth portion is completely
11 engaged with the gear wheel and the first teeth portion is disengaged with
12 the gear wheel, wherein the pawl moves between the first ratcheting
13 position and the second ratcheting position by rotating about an axis that
14 does not intersect said rigid body.
15
16 The reference of record relied upon by the Examiner as evidence of
17 anticipation is:
18 Hsieh US 6,044,731 Apr. 4, 2000
19
20 Claims 1, 2, 4-10, 12-14, 20-39, and 41-55 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. §
21 102 as anticipated by Hsieh.
22 According to the Appeal Brief, the claims stand or fall as a single group.
23 Therefore all claims on appeal will stand or fall with claim 1.
24 ISSUE
25 The sole issue for our consideration on appeal is whether claim 1 lacks
26 novelty over the Hsieh reference.
27 FINDINGS OF FACT
28 It is our finding that Hsieh discloses a double reversible ratcheting wrench
29 which has a pawl or stop block 3. The stop block 3 has two teeth portions 31, 31
30 that interact with the drive member 2. The argued difference for appeal is whether
31 the two teeth portions 31 on the pawl 3 of Hsieh have centers of curvature differing
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013