Appeal No. 1998-3271
Application No. 08/563,156
We find that, for the above reasons, the examiner has not
set forth a factual basis which is sufficient for establishing a
prima facie case of anticipation of the apparatus recited in the
appellants’ claim 5 and claims 6-8, 18-20 and 24 which depend
therefrom. Consequently, we reverse the rejection under 35
U.S.C. § 102(b) over Landis.
Rejection of claims 21, 22, 25 and 28
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Landis
The appellants’ claim 5, from which claim 21 indirectly
depends, requires a longitudinally elongated feed block which is
transversely disposed with respect to the direction of web travel
and which has coating feed passageways which are serially
disposed with a longitudinally elongated passageway therein.
Landis discloses what appears to be a cylindrical die (40) having
two bores (41 and 42) therein (figures 2 and 4). Landis prefers
that the two bores are positioned such that the plane defined by
the bores and the line connecting them are perpendicular to the
direction of web travel so that the maximum coating stripe
width/thickness ratio is obtained (col. 4, lines 20-26). Landis
also teaches that instead of two bores, a higher number of bores,
such as six, can be used to form wider coating stripes (col. 5,
14
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007