Appeal No. 1996-0345 Page 3
Application No. 08/101,999
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given
careful consideration to the appellants' specification and
claims, to the applied prior art reference, and to the
respective positions articulated by the appellants and the
examiner. As a consequence of our review, we make the
determinations which follow.
We shall not sustain the examiner's rejection of claims 5
through 7.
Barusten discloses a doctor blade used in combination
with a rubber-coated support roller for smoothing layers of
coating material applied to a paper web (7) conveyed between
the support roller and the blade. The blade is made of
flexible steel and is provided on its surface of operation
(the surface that engages the paper web) with a surface
coating (5) having greater abrasion resistance than that of
the steel blade (translation, page 8). Barusten discloses
that the coating is ideally "made to be round" or "convex"
through polishing (translation, page 11, lines 16 to 19, and
page 12, lines 3 to 6 and 11 to 17). Barusten does not
expressly disclose that the support roller has a concave outer
surface, much less that the surface of operation of the coated
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007