Appeal No. 1999-2544 Page 21
Application No. 08/796,513
the teaching of the subject matter of claims 5, 7, 18 and 19
does not make up for the deficiencies noted above with respect
to the rejections of claims 1 and 12 over Jackson in view of
Zwann or Lambert. Ebneth discloses a metal-coated textile
material and a process for its production (column 1, lines 4-
5), 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).
Accordingly, the rejection of claims 5, 7, 18 and 19 as
being unpatentable over Jackson in view of Zwann or Lambert,
and further in view of Ebneth is not sustained.
CONCLUSION
In summary, this panel of the Board has:
reversed the decision of the examiner to reject claims 1
through 11 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, as being
Page: Previous 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007