Appeal Number: 2007-0267
Application Number: 10/641,159
The examiner rejected claims 6 and 13 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Arthur and Butterworth and further in view of Wahle.
The examiner contends that Pryor and Arthur disclose the invention as
claimed except that Pryor and Arthur do not disclose an adjustable covering or an
adjusting step. The examiner relies on Butterworth for disclosing a window with
an adjustable covering element or shutter.
The appellants contend that Butterworth does not disclose an adjustable
covering element or shutter.
ISSUE
The sole issue for our consideration is whether the appellants have shown
that the examiner erred in finding that Butterworth discloses the step of adjusting a
window that includes at least one adjustable covering element that at least partially
defines an opening of the window wherein the adjusting step includes moving the
at least one adjustable covering element across the window as recited in claim 1.
This issue as it relates to claim 10 is whether the appellants have shown that the
examiner erred in finding that Butterworth discloses a window including at least
one adjustable covering element that at least partially defines an opening of the
window wherein movement of the at least one adjustable covering element across
the window adjusts the size of the opening.
FINDINGS OF FACT
The appellants’ specification discloses and depicts in Figure 1, a
displaceable covering sheet 7 which is used to control the amount of additive
applied to the filter tow by increasing or decreasing the size of the application area
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013