Appeal No. 96-3833
ApplicationApplication 08/014,320
calls it. See column 3, lines 10-13 of the VanSickle
specification. At the oral hearing, appellant’s counsel was
understood to agree with the examiner’s finding regarding
VanSickle’s elements 34.
It is evident that the backing strip lying between
VanSickle’s windshield-engaging blade portion and heating element
40 is part of blade 18 itself because, as the examiner noted, the
patentee’s specification states in column 3, lines 22-25, that
the “blade 18 would be secured to the supporting assembly 20 by
sliding the blade 18 through the channel formed by the
projections 34” (emphasis added). Since the only structure shown
to lie in the channel formed by projections 34 is this backing
strip, then the description that the blade 18 is in the channel
signifies that the backing strip must be part of the blade 18.
Furthermore, this strip portion of the blade is shown to lie in
contact with the attachment member 32. Based on these findings,
claim 32 does not distinguish from VanSickle by reciting that the
heating element is in physical contact with the blade and the
attachment member.
Also without merit is appellant’s argument on page 7 of the
brief that the backing strip portion of the blade must be an
insulating layer to “insulate the heating element from the wiper
-7-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007