Appeal No. 2000-2014
Application No. 08/713,672
temperature of the article which has already had its
temperature raised by the radiant heat transfer section.
Having carefully reviewed the teachings of each of
LePisto, Heikkilä and Karlsson, we find nothing therein which
would indicate or suggest that the airborne unit of any of
these applied references is capable of raising the temperature
of the web beyond the temperature to which it was raised in
the radiant dryer, as required by each of the independent
claims. Indeed, there is no indication that the air which is
directed to the web for drying in the airborne unit is at a
higher temperature than is the web after passing through the
radiant dryer.
The examiner points out that, as admitted by appellants,
temperature controls for achieving the temperature rates
recited by appellants are conventional in the heating art and
concludes from this that it would have been obvious to use
conventional temperature control means to adjust the
temperatures in the radiant and convection (airborne) sections
of any of the applied references to any desired temperature
(answer, page 4).
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007