Appeal No. 97-1175 Page 9
Application No. 08/383,361
The appellant's arguments (brief, pp. 7-12) are
unpersuasive for the following reasons. Contrary to the
appellant's assertion, it is our view that the references do
contemplate replacement of their shoes. In that regard,
Telesio specifically teaches (column 5, lines 29-32) that the
guide shoes 64 are relatively easily removable from the
storage bin for repair or reconditioning of their sliding
surfaces. In addition, it is our opinion that one skilled in
the art would reasonably be expected to draw an inference that
Herpich discloses the use of bolts 18 in order to permit the
easy assembly and disassembly of the shoes 15, 16 to the
flanges 14. In view of Telesio's teaching and the inference
drawn from Herpich, it is clear to us that the applied prior
art does not teach away from the claimed invention, but rather
suggests the claimed invention. Thus, it is our determination
that the combined teachings of Telesio and Herpich would have
suggested bolting Telesio's guide shoes 64 to the side
structural members 68 of the packer plate 20 instead of using
top and bottom welds.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007