Ex parte SKOW et al. - Page 2

                Appeal No. 96-1883                                                                                                         
                Application 08/078,380                                                                                                     

                34 and 35.   Claims 3, 4, 12 through 14, 16 and 36 have been2                                                                                                          
                canceled, and claims 6, 7, 9 through 11, 19 through 21, 23, 24,                                                            
                26, 27 and 33 stand withdrawn from consideration as being                                                                  
                directed to a non-elected species.                                                                                         
                        The appellants' invention is directed to an apparatus and                                                          
                method for handling and operating on an article.  The subject                                                              
                matter before us on appeal is illustrated by reference to claim                                                            
                1, which reads as follows:                                                                                                 
                        1.      An apparatus for handling and operating on an article                                                      
                comprising a member having a working surface, an opposing                                                                  
                surface, and at least one orifice beginning from at least one                                                              
                inlet, passing through the member, and having at least one outlet                                                          
                on the working surface to permit a fluid to enter the member                                                               
                through the inlet and pass through the orifice, wherein the fluid                                                          
                passing through the orifice handles and operates on an article                                                             
                located adjacent the working surface while preventing the article                                                          
                from contacting the working surface, wherein the member is a web                                                           
                comprising a plurality of stacked layers having major surfaces                                                             
                and connected to each other along the major surfaces, wherein the                                                          
                working surface comprises an outer major surface of one of the                                                             
                stacked layers, wherein the orifice is formed by respective                                                                
                openings in adjacent layers and is nonlinear to create an                                                                  
                angular, nonlinear, stepped path for the fluid, and wherein a                                                              
                direction of any fluid that exits the outlet is caused by the                                                              
                angular, nonlinear, stepped path.                                                                                          

                        2Two amendments made after the final rejection were entered                                                        
                for purposes of appeal, but did not alter the examiner's position                                                          
                regarding the patentability of the claims over the cited                                                                   
                reference (see Paper No. 31).  Claim 36, which was canceled by                                                             
                the appellants in Paper No. 30, erroneously was included in the                                                            
                appendix of claims attached to the Replacement Brief.                                                                      

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007