Appeal No. 1999-2544 Page 20
Application No. 08/796,513
(column 2, lines 29-35), but does not teach or suggest an
electrical heating means for electrically heating fibers on
their outer circumferential surface (the deficiency noted
above with respect to claim 1) or the heating means for
directly and substantially evenly heating an outer
circumferential surface of said hollow fibers (the deficiency
noted above with respect to claim 12).
For these reasons we will reverse the examiner's
rejection of claims 3 and 16 as obvious over Jackson in view
of Zwann or Lambert, and further in view of either Sumiyoshi
or Garcera.
The 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) rejection of claims 5, 7, 18 and 19
The rejection of claims 5 and 7, which are dependent on
claim 1, and claims 18 and 19, which are dependent on claim
12, as being unpatentable over Jackson in view of Zwann or
Lambert, and further in view of Ebneth will not be sustained
for the same reasons as recited above with respect to claims 1
and 12, respectively. Ebneth is applied by the examiner for
Page: Previous 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007