Appeal No. 1997-3267
Application 08/324,386
connected to the filter belt, 3) increasing the pressure in the
suction box to decouple the suction box and the filter belt and
4) moving the suction box relative to the pressure chamber to
return the suction box to the first position. Claim 9 also
includes a fifth step which repeats steps 1-4. Appellant’s
primary argument (brief, page 13) concerning the examiner’s
rejection relies on Stahl and Oosten teaching the suction box
being maintained at below atmospheric pressure, which in appel-
lant's view teaches away from appellant’s filtration device and
method as defined in claims 9 and 11 on appeal.
We believe the appellant has not fairly assessed the
collective teachings of the applied prior art. As previously
discussed, Stahl expressly teaches the vacuum or product space
being at a pressure above atmospheric. Oosten teaches
FIGS. 1a, b, c and d show the operation of a
device in accordance with the known art. A
mixture supply nozzle 1 applies a mixture
layer 2 to an endless filter belt 3, which is
guided along rollers 4 and 5 to be driven. A
suction box 6, adapted to move parallel to
the belt, communicates through a flexible
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007