Appeal No. 1998-1052
Application No. 08/683,600
Taking into account that Anderson may utilize ultraviolet
lamps for drying and/or curing the coated substrate, it is our
view that it would have been obvious to provide a vacuum
extractor head of the type disclosed by Bubley in Anderson in
order to achieve Bubley’s stated purpose of preventing any
harmful ozone from escaping into the atmosphere. In this
regard, we note that one of the inherent problems associated
with the use
of ultraviolet light to cure articles is that the curing
apparatus outputs ozone (Bubley, column 3, lines 37-42).
Appellants argue (brief, page 9) that there is no
incentive to combine Anderson and Bubley because Anderson does
not disclose any concern regarding ozone. Appellants also
note (brief, page
9) that in their dryer the extraction head is used to extract
moisture laden air from the exposure zone, and imply that this
circumstance is significant because it is not expressly taught
by the references. Appellants further argue (reply brief,
page 2) that Anderson uses reflectors on both sides of the web
and that this construction teaches directly away from the use
18
Page: Previous 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007