Ex Parte YASUI et al - Page 9



            Appeal No. 1998-3271                                                                       
            Application No. 08/563,156                                                                 

            block having a base portion remote from the web and a taper                                
            portion more proximate the web (figure 2), the feed block having                           
            a coating supply reservoir (13) within the base portion and                                
            extending longitudinally substantially the length thereof                                  
            (figures 2 and 3), the taper portion tapering from the base                                
            portion towards the web and terminating in a tip portion                                   
            proximate the web (figure 2), the tip portion including an                                 
            exterior surface (10) which extends longitudinally the length of                           
            the tip portion and parallel with and facing the web (figure 2),                           
            the feed block having a plurality of coating feed                                          
            passageways (14) terminating in apertures (11) formed in the tip                           
            portion exterior surface, the apertures communicating with the                             
            reservoir via respective associated coating feed passageways                               
            serially disposed with a longitudinally elongated passageway in                            
            the feed block (figure 3).  Hence, Watanabe anticipates the                                
            apparatus recited in the appellants’ claim 5.                                              
                  The appellants argue that Watanabe’s figure 5 shows that                             
            each of the apertures is connected to a common groove rather than                          
            to a plurality of feed passageways as required by the appellants’                          
            claim 5 (brief, pages 10-11).  This argument is not persuasive                             



                                                  9                                                    




Page:  Previous  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007