Appeal No. 96-2501
Application 08/177,243
For essentially the same reasons as expressed above with regard
to the rejections based on Doom and Kao, we find that the
rejections relying on Schulz must also be reversed. That is,
while
Schulz may disclose an open region of travel for fluids passing
through the conduit along its central longitudinal axis (e.g., in
Figs. 1 and 1b), when the limitation set forth in the last two
lines of appellant's independent claim 7 is given the
interpretation we have expressed above, it is clear that Schulz
has mixing elements which are "in contact with one another," as
that terminology would be understood by one of ordinary skill in
the art from appellant's disclosure, in that Schulz clearly has
numerous "crotches" where fibrous material, etc. can gather and
hang-up and encourage clogging or plugging of the mixer when
fibers, clumps and particulates are contained within the fluids
to be mixed.
In addition, with regard to the examiner's treatment of
dependent claim 6 in each of the § 102(b) rejections on appeal,
we must point out that as explained in the Manual of Patent
12
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007