Appeal No. 2001-0093
Application No. 08/947,149
and lines 18-27 in column 8). Nevertheless, it is clear that
patentee’s “laterally aligning” step includes the use of guide
rollers 16 (e.g., see Figures 3, 4 and 6 as well as lines 25-27
in column 7 and lines 3-5 in column 10). Since the here claimed
“laterally aligning” step must be performed “without a lateral
stop . . .,” Regterschot’s corresponding step must be regarded as
different because it includes the use of lateral stops in the
form of guide rollers 16.
As an alternative theory in support of his rejection, the
examiner argues that it would have been obvious to eliminate the
roller guides of Regterschot. This position is expressed in the
paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7 of the answer with the following
language:
[W]hile it would have been understood that some
assurance that the tire belt strip is generally in the
right position upon approaching the transition region
is important, the ordinary artisan would have readily
appreciated that the way in which this is accomplished
is not a critical or fundamental feature of the
Regterschot et al. invention. Further, it is submitted
that the artisan would have readily understood the
impact of lateral guides on the strip material and been
able to balance the desire for this type of preliminary
guiding versus the possibility for damage to the strip.
The ordinary artisan further is considered to be
adequately equipped with adequate skill to design a
device consistent with the Regterschot et al invention
that nevertheless does not require edge guides,
appropriate care being taken on positioning the
material that such guides are unnecessary. - note that
appellants have not indicated (and do not claim) that
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007