Ex Parte ITO et al - Page 3



          Appeal No. 2001-2265                                                        
          Application No. 09/151,934                                                  

                                       OPINION                                        
               We reverse the aforementioned rejection.                               
               JP ‘080 discloses a method for making an automotive sunshade           
          panel by using compression molding to bend a hollow aluminum                
          panel such that the panel has a radius of curvature which can be            
          11,200 mm (pages 8 and 15).                                                 
               Each of the appellants’ independent claims requires that               
          longitudinal edges of the hollow aluminum panel are flanged by              
          press forming or roll forming.  The examiner argues that the                
          JP ‘080 stretch part 19 is a flange (answer, pages 5, 7, 9, 12,             
          13, and 15).  Stretch part 19 is an edge portion which is formed            
          during the compression molding, as shown in figure 5, and is then           
          excised (page 15) to form a sunshade panel which, as shown in               
          figure 7, has no portion resembling a flange.                               
               The examiner argues that Westaway (page 2, lines 30-36)                
          would have led one of ordinary skill in the art to bend the                 
          JP ‘080 sunshade panel by passing it through the nip between                
          concave and convex rollers instead of using compression molding,            
          in order to reduce the cost and improve the retention of                    
          curvature (answer, page 7).  Using a metal roller in combination            
          with an elastic roller would have been obvious to one of ordinary           
          skill in the art, the examiner argues, in view of the appellants’           
                                          3                                           




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007