Appeal No. 2001-0093
Application No. 08/947,149
conveying devices which comprises a number of steps including the
step of “laterally aligning the belt construction strip, in a
region between the front tip and the rear tip [of the belt
constructions strip], in accordance with its position and without
a lateral stop to guide either of the lateral sides [of the belt
construction strip].” Further details of this appealed subject
matter are set forth in representative independent claim 1, a
copy of which taken from the appellants’ brief is appended to
this decision.
The following reference is relied upon by the examiner as
evidence of obviousness:
Regterschot et al. (Regterschot) 5,720,837 Feb. 24, 1998
(filed Aug. 1, 1995)
All of the appealed claims are rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 as being unpatentable over Regterschot.
We cannot sustain this rejection.
A pivotal issue on this appeal is whether the aforequoted
“laterally aligning” step of appealed claim 1 distinguishes over
Regterschot. The appellants argue that it does. The examiner,
on the other hand, expresses his contrary position in the
following manner on page 8 of the answer:
As briefly noted above, it can also be reasonably
considered that the present claim language does not
even exclude the presence of such upstream lateral
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007