Appeal No. 98-1184
Application 08/593,670
the examiner explained, how or why the combined teachings of
Dischler and Sack would have suggested a method wherein the
tension of the web subsequent to the treatment by the gaseous
fluid is no greater than approximately one-half of the tension
at which the web is supplied to the treatment zone as recited
in claim 2. The appellant's specification (see page 3)
indicates that this feature is significant in preventing
undesirable web creasing.
In summary and for the above reasons, the decision of the
examiner to reject claims 1 through 8 is affirmed with respect
to claims 1 and 3 through 8 and reversed with respect to claim
2.
AFFIRMED-IN-PART
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007