Appeal No. 97-4209
Application No. 08/532,507
Rather than reiterate the entire arguments of the
appellant's and examiner in support of their respective
positions, reference is made to the appellant's Brief (Paper
No. 8), the Final Rejection (Paper No. 6) and the Examiner's
Answer (Paper No. 9) for the full exposition thereof.
OPINION
In reaching our conclusions on the issues raised in this
appeal, we have carefully considered appellant's specification
and claims, the applied references, and the respective
viewpoints advanced by the appellant and the examiner. As a
consequence of our review, we have made the determinations
which follow.
The examiner found that Miller disclosed the subject
matter of independent claims 20, 29 and 30 except that Miller
did not disclose a concave profile across the width of the
grinding wheel. The examiner relies on Quintilio for teaching
a grinding wheel having a concave grinding profile across the
width. Quintilio discloses a grinding wheel for the machine
working of marble and granite. The profile of the grinding
wheel is concave. The examiner concluded:
-3-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007