Appeal No. 98-0676
Application No. 08/308,592
correct axial and radial initial position of the
pipe 33, enabling the subsequent operations.
From the above, it is readily apparent the claimed stop lever
performs an entirely different function than that of the
first, second and third groups of holding levers. That is,
the claimed stop lever functions as a work stop abutment to
initially position the work relative to the slot cutting
device in an axial direction, rather than simply being
"another holding lever" which can obviously be duplicated as
the examiner suggests. Indeed, there is neither reason nor
need for such a stop lever in the device of Hopf since the
pipe is simply pulled through the slot cutting device in
increments determined by the conveying structure (rather than
being pushed into the slot cutting device a predetermined
amount which is determined by the work stop abutment (i.e.,
stop lever)).
The decision of the examiner to reject claims 1, 2 and 5-
10 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 based on the combined teachings of
Hopf, Maroschak and Hoffman is reversed.
REVERSED
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007