Appeal 2007-1828
Application 10/772,811
ISSUES
The issues raised by the appeal brief include the rejections based on lack of
novelty and obviousness. Additionally, we sua sponte raise the issue of the
definiteness of claims 1-8 and enter a rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second
paragraph, pursuant to our authority under 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b).
FINDINGS OF FACT
Thorud discloses an apparatus for moving particulate matter, particularly,
snow. Thorud uses a body having a motor 10. The body has a cavity having open
face portion 14, a rearwall 18 and sidewalls 16 defining a partially semi-circular
cross-sectional shape. The cavity encloses the paddle assembly 30. The paddle
assembly is shown in Figures 2, 5 and 6. The paddle assembly has two paddles 32,
which are identical in shape and are offset 180° from one another about paddle
shaft 38. The paddles are actually comprised of two portions, a central section 34
and an end section 36 comprised of a “dog-eared portion” that acts as an auger to
move snow towards central portion 34. Col. 5, ll. 46-54. The paddles of Thorud
are complexly curved. The central portion 34 is of generally concave shape,
shaped similar to a scoop, to concentrate the particulate matter into the central
region and direct it upwardly and inwardly as shown by the vector arrows B in
Figure 2. Col. 5, ll. 31-41. It is our view that this complexly curved impeller with a
concave central portion cannot be said to be a paddle with a bottom wall arcuate
about an axis parallel to the shaft, as required by claims 9 and 16. We agree with
Appellants that the complexly curved central portion is concave or saddle shaped,
and it is most significantly curved around an axis that is perpendicular to the
paddle shaft. We acknowledge the Examiner’s reliance on Figure 6 of Thorud said
to show the bottom wall arcuate about an axis parallel to the shaft. However, we
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013