Appeal No. 2004-1142
Application No. 09/892,001
that the single core of the present invention means that both
roller covers must turn at the same rate and turn together (id.).
These arguments are not well taken since Wakat clearly
discloses all the features of the roller as recited in claim 11
on appeal, particularly since the axle 112 of Wakat is a single
annular axle in the interior and at the core of the roller cover
holder, thus corresponding to the “single interior annular core”
as claimed (Answer, page 11). Appellant is correct that “[a]
single core cannot roll at different rates” (Brief, page 11).
However, Wakat does not teach that the single interior annular
core (axle 112) rolls at different rates. Wakat teaches a roller
apparatus that allows “each of the roller covers to rotate at
different speeds” (col. 3, ll. 24-26, italics added; see also
col. 6, ll. 2-5). As explained by Wakat, the roller covers do
not move at different speeds when the roller apparatus is moved
straight up or down but
...when the roller apparatus 100 or 200 is moved in an
arcuate manner or other than straight up and down, the
rollers on the outside of the arc are capable of moving
along at a faster velocity than the roller covers toward the
inside of the arc. In other words, each roller rolls
separately from an adjacent roller. [col. 5, ll. 36-41].
Accordingly, we agree with the examiner that Wakat teaches dual
roller heads mounted on a single core as recited in claim 11 on
appeal.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007