Ex parte RITTER - Page 7

          Appeal No. 1997-4279                                                        
          Application No. 08/486,702                                                  

          applied to the belt surface and the belt remains clean; this                
          benefit being well known in the coating art as exemplified by               
          the explicit teaching of Klebanow (Fig. 1; column 3, lines 44               
          through 57).                                                                

               The argument advanced by appellant (brief, pages 4                     
          through 7) simply fails to persuade us that claim 1 is                      
          patentable under 35 U.S.C.  103.  Throughout the brief (pages              
          4 and 6), it is asserted that the German reference applies a                
          "dry" pressure-sensitive adhesive to sheets of paper.  This                 
          assessment is in error.  Even appellant's own specification                 
          (page 1) discusses the German reference as teaching a                       
          "partially dried" adhesive.  The German reference itself, in                
          its Abstract, in claim 1, and in its                                        

          description (page 5) expressly sets forth "at least partial                 
          drying" and "at least a partial drying process."                            

               Appellant's focus upon the timing of separation of                     
          overlapped sheets with the present invention as compared to                 
          the teaching of Klebanow is acknowledged.  However, separation              

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007