Application of Gazda, Patent Appeal No. 6083.
| Decision Date | 08 February 1955 |
| Docket Number | Patent Appeal No. 6083. |
| Parties | Application of Antoine GAZDA. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Customs and Patent Appeals (CCPA) |
Wenderoth, Lind & Ponack, Washington, D. C. (John E. Lind, Washington, D. C., of counsel), for appellant.
E. L. Reynolds, Washington, D. C. (S. W. Cochran, Washington, D. C., of counsel), for the Commissioner of Patents.
Before O'CONNELL, Acting Chief Judge, and JOHNSON, WORLEY, and COLE, Judges.
This appeal involves the question of whether patentable subject matter has been defined in claims 9, 10, 11, 13, and 14 of appellant's application for a patent on a clock wound by the steering wheel of a vehicle. The Primary Examiner of the United States Patent Office rejected these claims as lacking in invention over a combination of prior art references and his decision was affirmed by the Board of Appeals.
The appealed claims relate to a clock mounted in the center of the steering wheel of an automobile or similar vehicle wherein the mainspring is wound by the operator when moving the steering wheel during normal driving. The clock casing is fixed to the steering wheel and means are provided which are also fixed relative to the movement of the wheel for winding the mainspring.
Claim 9 is set forth as representative of those on appeal, defining appellant's clock winding mechanism as follows:
Claims 10, 11, 13, and 14 do not materially differ from claim 9 except that in these claims provision is made for a fixed plug in the casing wall, the pawl being connected thereto.
In the drawings accompanying appellant's written specification, the specific construction of the clock mechanism for actuating the hands is not shown, except for the mainspring and cooperating gears, as appellant explains that any standard time mechanism may be employed.
The Solicitor for the Patent Office, in describing the general operation of appellant's device, states in his brief that Overwind of the mainspring is prevented by utilizing means similar to that provided by the inventor Von Loehr in his U. S. Patent 211,280.
In rejecting the claims on appeal, the board relied upon the following prior clock art references: Whitehead et al. 1,946,890, Feb. 13, 1934; Amburgey, 1,935,760, Nov. 21, 1933; Hennessey, 1,536,850, May 5, 1925.
The patent to Whitehead et al. is for a clock mechanism for automobiles and the like, the essential object of which is stated in that inventor's specification as being "the provision of a durable reliable and convenient clock-mechanism for automatically effecting the winding of a time-piece as an incident to steering." Whitehead's clock is stationary relative to the car, being mounted on the stationary structure of the steering column (instead of movable with the wheel as in appellant's device), and is wound through a gearing connection by turning the steering wheel in one direction only. Specifically, as stated by the examiner below, the clock is wound "by rotating the steering wheel relative to the stationary column to which the clock is fixed, the steering wheel being connected to the mainspring through a gearing including a ratchet connection whereby the clock is wound by rotation of the steering wheel in one direction only." In addition to the clock winding mechanism, Whitehead's wheel has several control features with which we are not directly concerned and the clock casing is mounted for reciprocation to open and close a horn switch.
The patent to Amburgey has particular reference to a power transmission mechanism connected to a clock for utilizing wind power to wind up the spring motor of the clock. The clock is mounted within a rotatable member, such as a sign (supported by a stationary...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ex parte Luft
... ... § 134 from the ... examiner's rejection of claims 10-20 which constitute all ... the claims pending in this application. The disclosed ... invention pertains to an adapter for electrical plug-in ... connections on fuel injectors ... See Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, ... 86 S.Ct. 684 (1966); In re Gazda, 42 CCPA 770, 773, ... 219 F.2d 449, 451 (1955); See also In re ... Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 555 (CCPA 1975) ... In ... ...
-
Ex parte Menendez
... Ex parte NEREID A MARIA MENENDEZ, PAULA S. WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL J. MANIS Appeal no. 2015-602128 Application No. 12/650, 113 Technology Center 3600 United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board May 4, 2017 ... have been known to and within the abilities of one of ... ordinary skill. In re Gazda, 219 F.2d 449 (CCPA ... 1955). As we find supra, there is no patentable ... distinction among a reservation, transaction, and ... ...
-
Best Medical International, Inc. v. Worlwide Medical Technologies, LLC
... ... agree with the Patent Owner. The test for sufficiency of ... written description is "whether the disclosure of the ... application relied upon reasonably conveys to those skilled ... in the art that the inventor had possession of the claimed ... subject matter as of ... it would have been obvious to practice the reverse by ... increasing the size of the plug. See In re Gazda, ... 219 F.2d 449, 452 (CCPA 1955) (reversal of parts would be an ... obvious expedient); see also In re Einstein, 46 F.2d ... ...
-
Ex parte Alvanos
...wears during operation and, therefore, making the knife edge removable would facilitate maintenance. (App. Br. 4.) Appellant argues that Gazda decided well before Graham v. John Deere, 386 U.S. 1 (1966), and thus, is questionable law at best. (App. Br. 4.) With respect to claim 19, Appellan......