Appeal No. 2001-0573
Application No. 08/638,245
position (answer, pages 8-9), we do not see that Scales can be
said to "clearly . . . [teach/suggest] that sharp corners of
cutting teeth are high stress areas that should not have high
surface carbon such that fatigue crack generation is
minimized."
More specifically, we find nothing in Scales, AAPA, or
Scott which addresses the specific area of the cutter teeth
where appellants have discovered a problem of fatigue cracking
as a result of excessive carbon build-up. Thus, nothing in
the Scales patent or the other prior art applied by the
examiner in any way relates to the particular problem
confronted by appellants or to the results achieved by
appellants' claimed method, i.e., an intentional "relatively
softer" wear area provided on each of the selected teeth at
the selected location which will intentionally wear away more
quickly during use and thereby prevent crack formation that
could lead to tooth breakage. Contrary to the examiner's
assertions on page 9 of the answer that the claims on appeal
do not specifically indicate what the selected regions of the
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007