Appeal No. 97-3064
Application 08/235,332
We AFFIRM-IN-PART.
The appellant’s invention pertains to a method and
apparatus for transporting an elongated flexible resilient
strip having a nominally curved lateral cross section. Copies
of claims 1 and 15 may be found in the appendix to the brief.
The reference relied on by the examiner is:
Wittel 1,933,783 Nov. 7,
1933
Claims 1 and 15 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b)
as being anticipated by Wittel.
The examiner’s rejection is explained on pages 4 and 5 of
the answer. The arguments of the appellant and examiner in
support of their respective positions may be found on pages 6-
8 of the brief, pages 1-4 of the reply brief and pages 5-7 of
the answer.3
3The examiner in the answer noted that the appellant
stated in the brief that claims 1 and 15 “stand or fall
together” and, accordingly, confined the arguments in the
answer to only apparatus claim 15. We must point out,
however, that in the reply brief (which the examiner entered)
on pages 3 and 4 the appellant presented separate arguments as
to method claim 1 and urged that the argument and cases relied
on by the examiner “are not applicable to method claim 1 which
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007