Appeal No. 1999-1408 Page 7
Application No. 08/809/629
Independent apparatus claim 36 stands rejected on the basis of the combined
teachings of Hofmann and Leweringhaus, and we also will sustain this rejection. The
Hofmann apparatus produces molded glass bodies in accordance with a molding method
in which a press mold that determines the external shape of the molded glass body, and
into which a predetermined quantity of molten glass can be poured, operates in
conjunction with a molding plug that determines the internal shape of the molded glass
body. In the molding operation molten glass held in the mold is pressed against the
molding plug. The molding plug (97) is mounted on a piston in an air motor cylinder
carried by a bracket (102) that pivots about an axis extending transversely to the center
axis of the molding plug. After the molten glass has been placed in the mold, the mold plug
is pivotally moved from an initial position outside of the press mold into the operating
4
position. Pressurized air from beneath and vacuum from above cause the molten glass to
be pressed into contact with the plug, thus forming the desired object. Applying the same
rationale with regard to the term “press-molding” and the phrase “predetermined temporal
dependency on force and feed” that was set forth above in conjunction with method claim
4We note that while the appellant has recited these two elements in means-plus-
function form, he has not argued under the sixth paragraph of 35 U.S.C. § 112 that the
structure relied upon by the examiner is not the same as that disclosed in his specification
or the equivalent thereof (see Valmont Indus. Inc. v. Reinke Mfg. Co.,
983 F.2d 1039, 1042, 25 USPQ2d 1451, 1454 (Fed. Cir 1993)), and we therefore
presume that he concedes this issue.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007