Appeal No. 98-2158 Page 3
Application No. 08/610,279
of their respective positions may be found on pages 8-15 of the
brief and pages 6 and 7 of the answer.
OPINION
Considering first the rejection of claims 17-20, 28, 29
and 32 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being clearly anticipated by
Anderson, in setting forth this rejection the examiner states
that:
Anderson disclose[s] a skate sharpener (Fig. 16)
having generally flat converging lower inside walls,
a longitudinal slot, a cylindrical abrasive member,
means/holder (131) to retain [the] stone in [the]
chamber, and a groove to rotate [the] member.
[Answer, page 4.]
By way of further explanation, the examiner on page 7 of the
answer indicates that the recitation of "generally flat"
converging side walls "broadly reads on the sharpener of
Anderson" and that Anderson shows
a holder (131,132) which has a cavity for abrasive
member (130) which is a cylindrical member having
abrasive means (127) thereon, and therefore, member
(130) is "an abrasive member".
We will not support the examiner's position. Independent
claim 17 expressly requires that (1) the body means have
"generally flat converging lower inside walls" and (2) "a
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007