Appeal 2007-2452
Application 10/421,761
1 ordinary skill in the art to make Ichiryu’s bearings nonmagnetic to avoid that
2 problem.
3 The Appellants argue that Modien does not teach or suggest that bearings
4 146 and 148 are configured to permit tilting (Br. 12). The Appellants argue that
5 the chamfering of Modien’s bearings would not necessarily result in tilting (Reply
6 Br. 8). The Appellants’ disclosure indicates that by “clearance fit” the Appellants
7 mean that the bearings have an end portion curvature (Spec. 9:3-9). That end
8 portion curvature appears comparable to Modien’s chamfering of the bearing’s
9 inside and outside end portions (compare the Appellants’ Spec. 9:3-9 and figs. 1, 3,
10 4 and 5 with Modien’s col. 6, ll. 24-27 and figs. 2 and 3). Moreover, Modien’s
11 bearings have not only chamfering, but also have a frustoconical section (146f,
12 148f) that extends approximately one-half the length of the bearing and provides
13 clearance to the shaft through the bearings and compensates for non-concentricity
14 of the bearings to the centerline of that shaft (Modien, col. 6, ll. 21-24). This
15 frustoconical section, in combination with the chamfered inside and outside end
16 portions of the bearings (fig. 3), appear to enable the bearing to tilt to provide the
17 desired compensation for non-concentricity with the shaft.
18 For the above reasons we are not convinced of reversible error in the
19 rejections of claims 1 and 4-9.
20 Claims 2 and 3
21 Bircann ‘519 discloses an exhaust recirculation valve having a compression
22 spring (112) between a bearing (98) and an armature (146) to provide a biasing
23 force to maintain a tight face seal between a shoulder (84) and the bearing’s
24 surface (106) opposite the armature while permitting the bearing to move in a
25 radially aligning fashion (Bircann ‘519, col. 5, ll. 20-26; col. 6, ll. 13-14; fig. 2).
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013