Appeal No. 97-4048
Application 08/371,934
and thus limit our comments regarding the appealed rejections
to independent claims 18 and 19.
In reaching our decision on the issues raised in this
appeal, we have carefully considered appellants’ specification
and claims, the applied references, and the respective
viewpoints expressed by appellants and the examiner. As a
consequence of our review, we have made the determination that
the examiner’s rejections of the claims on appeal will be
sustained. Our reasoning follows.
Like the examiner, we consider that claim 18 on appeal is
readable on the carpet cutting method disclosed in MacDonald.
As explained on pages 5 and 6 of the answer, the cutting of
the carpet in MacDonald includes the steps of a) bending the
pile elements of the carpet piece (24) downward toward the
base portion of the carpet along a line to be cut (i.e., via
movement of the portion of arm 14 and extension member 32
thereof located immediately in front of cutting blade 20' in
the direction of movement of the cutting blade 20' along the
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007