Appeal No. 98-3125
Application Nos. 08/294,730, 90/003,655, 90/003,826 and
90/004,552
In understanding the language "auxiliary feed means" in
claim 1 on appeal, we have looked to appellants’ specification
and note that they have indicated on several occasions (e.g.,
col. 2, lines 51-54, and col. 3, lines 28-30) that such feed
means may be "an auxiliary conveyor" or, more specifically, "a
very rugged auxiliary conveyor located between the head end of
the chain [main] conveyor and the inlet of the debarking
drum." In our opinion, this is exactly what is described with
respect to the embodiment of the debarking apparatus noted in
Sepling above, wherein there is a main chain conveyor
associated with the loading section (2) and a separate
"auxiliary" chain conveyor associated with the feed cylinder
(3).
Dependent claim 2 recites that the "auxiliary feed means
has a low friction region" and provides that said low friction
region "has a length in the feed direction which is less than
the diameter of the debarking drum." No such "low friction
region" is found in Sepling. Claim 3 depends from claim 2 and
further defines the "low friction region," while claim 5
15
Page: Previous 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007