Appeal No. 1997-1731
Application No. 08/377,924
materials. The example is given of making the angle of
inclination of an outer conical surface containing a helical
groove or grooves less than that of the inner conical surface
of an adjacent die element in order to vary the width of the
conical passage therebetween.
Each of independent claims 39, 40, and 41 addresses an
extrusion die apparatus with the features, inter alia, of die
elements each having an outer conical surface inclined at an
acute angle which is less than that of an inner conical
surface (decreasing cross-sectional area of conical passage
defined by the conical surfaces) and a helical groove in the
outer conical surface, with the depth of the helical groove
decreasing as the groove approaches annular thickness control
passages.
This panel of the board understands the examiner’s point
of view as articulated in the answer (pages 8 through 10) and
fully appreciates the assessment and application of the
applied Siard, Briggs ‘526, Teutsch, and Briggs ‘775 teachings
in the rejection before us. However, the difficulty that we
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007