Appeal No. 2001-0394
Application 09/012,508
for use in the drying section of a paper machine where the paper
web does not travel between opposing rolls. See Appeal Brief,
page 8, second paragraph. Although Heinzmann notes that air
guide boxes are suitable for use in conjunction with various
paper making equipment, none of the listed devices includes two
opposing rolls. See Heinzmann, column 1, lines 9-18. Thus,
Heinzmann is necessarily concerned with stabilizing the paper
web. Heinzmann’s air guide box system is designed to control the
flow conditions in the air gap (see id., lines 32-37 and lines
57-65) but is not designed for removal of entrained air so as to
create a hermetic seal as required by Beisswanger.
We find no support in the teachings of the prior art
for the examiner’s conclusion that it would have been obvious to
have modified Beisswanger to include an air guide box system as
taught by Heinzmann for the purpose of improving web handling.
Therefore, we conclude that the examiner’s rejection can only be
based upon improper hindsight reasoning. See W.L. Gore & Assocs.
v. Garlock, Inc., 721 F.2d 1540, 1553, 220 USPQ 303, 312-13 (Fed.
Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 851 (1984) (“To imbue one of
ordinary skill in the art with knowledge of the invention in
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007