Appeal No. 2002-1127
Application No. 09/042,897
Appellants’ invention pertains to a method for cutting a photoresist film web material. An
understanding of the invention can be derived from a reading of exemplary claim 12, which is
reproduced in Appendix “A” to the main brief.
The references relied upon by the examiner in the final rejection are:
Helprin 2,310,838 Feb. 09, 1943
Miyake 4,743,325 May 10, 1988
D’Angelo et al. 5,442,983 Aug. 22, 1995
Claims 12-14 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Miyake in
view of D’Angelo.
Claims 12-14 stand further rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over
Miyake in view of Helprin.
Reference is made to appellants’ main and reply briefs (Paper Nos. 20 and 22) and to the
examiner’s answer (Paper No. 21) for the respective positions of appellants and the examiner
regarding the merits of these rejections.
Discussion
As may be discerned from a reading of claim 12, appellants’ method includes the steps of
cutting a photoresist film web by utilizing first and second blades fixedly positioned on a blade
holder that moves in first and second directions substantially perpendicular to the direction of
motion of the web, wherein said blades are positioned at an angle of from about ten degrees to
about fifteen degrees relative to the web material.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007