Appeal No. 2005-1262
Application No. 09/864,809
an outlet from the mixer section. As is the case above with
respect to claim 1, examiner’s finding that Larsen’s steam pipe 5
constitutes such a mix head is untenable.
Accordingly, we shall not sustain the standing 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(b) rejection of independent claims 1 and 17, and dependent
claims 2 through 7, 18, 19, 26, 28, 30 and 31, as being
anticipated by Larsen.
II. The 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) rejection of claims 8 through 10, 12,
14, 16, 20, and 21 as being unpatentable over Larsen
In addition to not disclosing a valve assembly or molding
system comprising a mix head as recited in independent claims 1
and 17, Larsen would not have suggested same to a person having
ordinary skill in the art.
Accordingly, we shall not sustain the standing 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) rejection of dependent claims 8 through 10, 12, 14, 16,
20, and 21 as being unpatentable over Larsen.
III. The 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) rejection of claims 1 through 5, 7
through 10, 12, 14, 16 through 21, 26, 28, 30 and 31 as being
anticipated by Paulson
Paulson discloses a cornet comprising a mouth pipe 21, three
crooks 10, 11 and 12, three spring-biased, finger-actuatable
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007