Appeal No. 1997-3024
Application 08/325,476
edge of a coating width regulation plate such that the product
of the distance T between point P and the support surface is
within the range called for in claims 1 and 6. This is so
because Shibata’s distance C does not relate to the distance
between the nearest point of a coating width regulation plate
and the support surface.
As is apparent from appellants’ Figure 2, the distance T
between the nearest point P of the coating width regulation
plate and the support is the sum of “a”, the distance between
point P and downstream edge portion of element 5, and “t”, the
thickness of the precoat 35. Thus, distance T includes the
thickness of the precoat 35. In maintaining that distance C
of Shibata corresponds to appellants’ distance T, the examiner
appears to have inadvertently made several unfounded
assumptions regarding Shibata. First, the examiner appears to
have assumed that Shibata’s web contacts the coating head at
point 10, which may or may not be correct. Second, the
examiner appears to have assumed that Shibata’s web lies in a
plane parallel to the upper surface of the plate 7 as it run
across the coating head, such that distance C corresponds to
the nearest point between the web and the plate. This also
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007