Appeal No. 1999-2114
Application 08/821,711
material in the mold. Like claim 20, claim 21 does not
require that the same force be maintained during the sliding
movement of the gate as was applied to compress the material
into a block. Claim 21 only refers to “a force.” It is our
opinion that this limitation is met by the force from the
weight of the gate 7 or the force from the lower plunger 3
being exerted on the material to hold it in position.
Accordingly, we will sustain this rejection.
As is apparent from the foregoing, the examiner’s
rejection of claims 13-15 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being
anticipated by BPS ‘215, of claims 13-16 under 35 U.S.C. § 103
based on BPS ‘215 and of claims 17-19 under 35 U.S.C. § 103
based on BPS ‘215 in view of Stout are reversed. The
examiner’s rejection of claims 20 and 21 under 35 U.S.C. § 103
based solely on BPS ‘215 is sustained. Accordingly, the
decision of the examiner is affirmed-in-part.
12
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007