Ex Parte Shermer et al - Page 3

               Appeal 2007-3147                                                                             
               Application 10/072,435                                                                       

                      Claims 2-6, 18-19, and 21-23 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)                  
               as unpatentable over Martin in view of Simons and Pearce (id.).                              
                      Appellants contend that Martin fails to disclose configurations or                    
               regions of weakened material that can modify the abrasive sheet so that the                  
               sheet will correspond with different platens (Br. 10-11).  Appellants also                   
               contend that Simons fails to disclose a first configuration of sandpaper for                 
               use with a first platen and separating the sandpaper along score lines 4 to                  
               provide the paper with a second configuration corresponding to a second                      
               platen (Br. 11).                                                                             
                      Appellants contend that neither Martin, Simons, nor Pearce discloses                  
               or suggests multiple tip configurations of different shapes and sizes, while                 
               Pearce fails to disclose or suggest an abrasive sheet including a tip portion                
               and second and third segments of weakened material (Br. 15-17; Reply Br.                     
               3).                                                                                          
                      The Examiner contends that Simons teaches first segments defining                     
               regions of weakened material, where the sheet is adapted to be separated                     
               along the first segment to change the configuration of the body portion                      
               (Answer 3-4).                                                                                
                      The Examiner contends that Pearce discloses a plurality of segments                   
               that define regions of weakened material where the sheet is adapted to be                    
               separated along two different segments to correspond with a plurality of                     
               sanding machines (Answer 5-6).                                                               
                      Accordingly, the issue presented from the record in this appeal is as                 
               follows: Does the combination of Martin, Simons, and Pearce disclose or                      
               suggest tip portions that are separable from the body portion as well as body                


                                                     3                                                      

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next

Last modified: September 9, 2013