Appeal No. 96-0089
Application No. 08/027,060
been obvious to do so at the precise location and in the
particular system defined by appellants' claims.
Appellants offer a reasonable basis for concluding that
there would be no critical need for providing suction or
reduced pressure at an outlet nip in either the system of
Autio or Skaugen inasmuch as in these systems, unlike
appellants' system, the run of the press felt between the
transfer roll and a press nip is curved; thereby providing a
mechanism for tensioning the web against the press felt. In
this regard, we emphatically disagree with the examiner's
conclusion that the claims do not require the entire run of
the press felt, from roll to subsequent press nip, to be
straight. On the contrary, in our view the claims clearly
require that the recited "substantially straight run" extend
"from" the transfer roll to the press nip.
With regard to all three of the primary references,
including Laapotti, we note that appellants' system has been
specifically designed to counter a number of problems which
tend to occur in such systems as fully explained in the Brief
and Reply Brief. The primary references, on the other hand,
do not even recognize that these particular problems exist.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007