Appeal No. 1998-1430
Application No. 08/376,298
comprising a slab-like attaching section 1 and a slab-like
tread section 2. Section 1 includes a flange 3 adjacent to
the periphery of the section, and section 2 includes a
peripheral flange 4 for receiving the flange of section 1.
Each section includes cone-shaped bosses 6 extending from one
side of the section. The bosses have recesses 9 and 10
extending partially therethrough, with the bosses of section 2
being recessed at 8 to receive the ends of the bosses of
section 1. As with the rejection based on Derderian, we do
not think an artisan, consistent with appellant’s
specification, would construe such structure as corresponding
to the claimed flexible “sheet” of substantially uniform
thickness having “indentations” therein. In our view, Staats-
Oels’ slab-like sections 1 and 2 do not define "sheets" (e.g.,
thin pieces of material having a broad, generally flat,
continuous surface), and Staats-Oels’ cone-shaped bosses 6 do
not define “indentations” (e.g., structures that are impressed
in or stamped from sections 1 and 2). Here again, the
examiner’s position to the contrary is strained and
unreasonable. Further, Staats-Oels contains no teaching of
making either section as a “sheet” having “indentations”
-7-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007