Appeal No. 2002-2090
Application 08/430,311
As for appellant’s assertion that Givens does not anticipate
“plain concrete” as that term should be understood from claim 74,
we remain of the view expressed above that Givens discloses a
“plain concrete” as broadly set forth in the claims before us on
appeal, i.e., a structural concrete inclusive of a multitude of
short steel fibers uniformly distributed randomly therein and
wherein “said plain concrete” carries all the flexural tensile
stresses and whose maximum flexural strength is attained at the
full cracking load thereof. Moreover, as is made clear in Givens
(e.g., col. 6, lines 18-21), the fibrous concrete therein is
formulated to have an excellent wear resistance and enhanced
resistance to surface cracking and spalling upon exposure to heat
and weather. From Romualdi (col. 10, lines 19-25) it is also
clear that the fibrous concrete is formulated to have concrete
shrinkage volume change compensating properties. Contrary to
appellant’s arguments (brief, page 16, reply brief, pages 9-10),
based on the disclosure in appellant’s specification, we do not
see that the “consisting of plain concrete” language of claim 74
requires a concrete formulation without any fibrous pieces to
provide the properties noted in the claim. Again, we note that
19
Page: Previous 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007