Appeal No. 97-1884
Application 08/051,377
caused by wobble or changes in verticality of the stirring
shaft 3.
The examiner acknowledges (Answer, page 5) that “Pollard
lacks teaching of providing means to measure the revolutions
per unit time of the stirring shaft teaching instead that the
stirring shaft is rotated at a constant angular velocity (eg.
see column 6[,] lines 19-21).”
In summary, the 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) rejection of claims 1
through 3 and 20 is reversed because Pollard does not measure
wobble, verticality or rate of revolutions.
DECISION
The decision of the examiner rejecting claims 1 through 3
and 20 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) is reversed.
REVERSED
KENNETH W. HAIRSTON )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
ERROL A. KRASS ) APPEALS AND
Administrative Patent Judge ) INTERFERENCES
)
)
)
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007