Appeal No. 2002-0963
Application No. 08/122,344
tape. However, there is no teaching or suggestion to
utilize multiple means of heating in close sequence to
effect curing in situ as recited by claim[s] 1 [and
32].
In sum, none of the references relied on by the examiner,
either alone or in combination, suggest passing a thermoset resin
impregnated fiber tow or tape through a preheating zone of a
fiber placement apparatus prior to laying up the fiber tow or
tape on the mandrel as claimed. Therefore, the rejections of
claims 1 and 32 are reversed. Since claims 2 through 11 and 14
through 31 depend on claim 1, the rejections of claims 2 through
11 and 14 through 31 are also reversed.
REVERSED
EDWARD C. KIMLIN )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
ADRIENE LEPIANE HANLON ) APPEALS AND
Administrative Patent Judge ) INTERFERENCES
)
)
)
CHUNG K. PAK )
Administrative Patent Judge )
ALH:svt
16
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007