Appeal 2007-1804
Application 10/885,053
assembly. It has not been argued that the torsion spring of Stein does not
provide a biasing force. Rather, Appellants assert that “[t]he torsion spring
10a does not engage in any part of the canister assembly 102 and as such
cannot provide a biasing force between the nozzle assembly and the canister
assembly as explicitly required by claim 28” (Br. 9). The subject matter of
claim 28 does not require the biasing member to engage the canister
assembly. Rather, the subject matter of 28 requires a biasing force to occur
somewhere between the nozzle assembly and the canister assembly. There
is no requirement that the biasing force engage both the nozzle assembly and
the canister assembly. Stein discloses that the torsion spring 10a biases the
inner part of the nozzle assembly 4 in a counterclockwise rotational direction
with respect to the outer housing of the brush attachment (Col. 4, ll. 55-60).
Appellants also have not argued that the torsion spring of Stein does not
reduce vibration in the vacuum cleaner.
For the forgoing reasons and those set forth in the Answer, the
decision of the Examiner rejecting claims 28 and 30-32 is affirmed.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a)(1)(iv)(2006).
AFFIRMED
cam
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013