Appeal No. 2001-0065
Application 09/048,289
1) A commercial mill in Norrsundet, Sweden may practice the invention.
2) A commercial mill in Imatra, Finland may practice the invention.
3) In 1996 Mr. Pikka co-authored a paper on the process that was selected for
publication based (in part) upon whether it relates to new information of interest to the
pulp and paper trade. Mr. Pikka in his declaration states that the process reported in
the article is according to the invention, and results in higher yield, savings in chemicals,
improved cleanliness, heat economy, reduced foaming and anti-foaming agent.
4) In 1998 Mr. Pikka co-authored a paper on the process that was selected for
publication based (in part) upon whether it relates to new information of interest to the
pulp and paper trade. Mr. Pikka in his declaration states that the process reported in
the article is according to the invention, and results in higher quality pulp, improved
yield, cleaner, and improved economy by reduction of heat expenses.
The Examiner was unconvinced by the declaration of Pikka, noting, inter alia,
that:
The evidence suggested shows that some processes, it is not clear if it is the
claimed process, has been used commercially. There is no evidence that the
technology has been sold or otherwise been commercially successful. There is
no evidence that this technology has been sold to other companies? Nor has
evidence been presented to show that sales increased due to the new
technology. The evidence presented is “not” commensurate in scope with the
claims. The claims call for separating the accepts and rejects and “directly”
transporting the rejects to the fiber line. The Commercial mills pass the reject to
other screening and pressing stages after the accept and reject separation. It is
“not” directly transported to the fiber line. There is no evidence that any
commercial success was due to the “direct” recycle of the rejects. For example,
Exhibit A shows the reject passing from the screens (M800,M400) to some other
structures. It is not “directly transported” to the main line. The additional
structures appear to include a screw press. Such a press would mechanically
work the pulp. The screw press would break up any remaining shives.
12
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007