Appeal No. 2002-0416
Application 08/902,625
With regard to whether Knecht teaches “pleated filter media
having pleats defined by peaks and valleys which join panels
extending in a selected direction parallel to the selection [sic]
direction of the frame, the valleys of the filter media all lying
in the same plane being positioned below the mounting frame and
the peaks rising to at least the bottom of the frame and all
lying in the same plane” [emphasis added], the examiner argues
that Knecht does disclose this aspect of the claimed invention as
items 2 and 5 in Figure 2 of Knecht. (answer, page 15).
We find that Figure 2 of Knecht shows pleated folds 1 in the
form of zig-zag folds 2 that are positioned below mounting frame
3. Pleated folds 1 have peaks and valleys. Zig-zag folds 2 have
peaks and valleys. The peaks and valleys of pleated folds 1 are
not in the same plane as the peaks and valleys of zig-zag folds
2. Hence, we agree with appellants’ position on this issue made
on page 9 of the brief. The rejection does not recognize this
difference and does not address why modification of this
difference, to arrive at appellants’ claimed invention, would
have been obvious.
Furthermore, we note that the examiner acknowledges that
Knecht does not indicate if the filtering material is suitable
for filtering transmission oil. The examiner relies upon Thorman
for teaching that paper is a suitable material for filtering
transmission oil, and therefore it would have been obvious to
modify Knecht’s filter by using paper as the filtering material
for filtering transmission oil. (answer, page 5). Yet, Knecht’s
disclosure is silent as to (1) what kind of medium is filtered
and (2) what type of filter material is used in the filter
device. The rejection does not fully address all of these
deficiencies of Knecht.
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007