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
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007