Appeal No. 2000-0590 Page 4
Application No. 08/019,500
parts, an adapter support part and a crosshead connected to said adapter
support part and located on a side of a respective roll stand post remote
from the space between said roll stand posts,
wherein the universal rolling mill stand further comprises a vertical roll
screw-down or adjustment system disposed in each crosshead, said U-
shaped abutment part being disposed between said adapter and said roll
screw-down or adjustment system.
As explained on page 4 of the specification, this arrangement causes the vertical and the
horizontal rolls to be exposed and accessible from the inside of the space between the
pulled apart stand posts, and permits adjustment of the vertical rolls in the horizontal plane.
It is the examiner’s view that all of the claimed structure is disclosed by Soderberg,
with the exception that the Soderberg spaced apart horizontal support plates are not
separate, the guide frames are not of two-part construction, and the vertical roll screw-
down or adjustment system is not located in accordance with the claim. In the examiner’s
opinion, however, whether or not the horizontal support plates are separate is a matter of
design choice, and it would have been obvious to reconfigure the vertical roll guide frames
and the roll adjustment system to the manner recited in claim 14 in view of the teachings of
Bond. The appellants argue that one of ordinary skill in the art would not have been
motivated to combine the teachings of the two references in the manner proposed by the
examiner because it would result in complete destruction of the intended arrangement in
Soderberg, and that even if such were done, the result would not be the claimed invention
(Brief, pages 11 and 12).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007