Appeal No. 2003-0192
Application No. 08/871,300
2002) and reply brief (Paper No. 26, filed September 25, 2002)
for the arguments thereagainst.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given
careful consideration to appellant's specification and claims, to
the applied prior art reference and APA, and to the respective
positions articulated by appellant and the examiner. As a
consequence of our review, we have made the determination which
follows.
In rejecting claims 20 through 22 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
on the basis of the collective teachings of the APA and Goetz
'379, it is the examiner's position (answer, pages 3-4) that the
APA discloses appellant's claimed clamp and conveyor assembly
except for the slot having a pair of spaced, central portions
having concave walls. To address this difference the examiner
turns to Goetz '379, urging that this patent teaches "clamp
sections incorporating first and second side walls with spaced,
central portions having concave walls (best illustrated in Figure
5)." From this teaching, the examiner concludes that it would
44
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007