Appeal No. 2002-2123 Page 2
Application No. 09/197,140`
BACKGROUND
The appellants' invention relates to a method and apparatus for continuously
seaming cured stock wide panels of EPDM membrane to form a composite EPDM
roofing membrane of predetermined width and indefinite length (specification, p. 1). A
copy of the claims under appeal is set forth in the appendix to the appellants' brief.
The prior art of record relied upon by the examiner in rejecting the appealed
claims is:
Cardinal, Jr. 4,050,972 Sept. 27, 1977
Hollis 4,343,667 Aug. 10, 1982
McCarville et al. 4,931,126 June 5, 1990
(McCarville)
Davis et al. 5,545,685 Aug. 13, 1996
The examiner also relied upon the appellants' admission of prior art (specification, page
1, lines 14 to 30) relating to applying sheets of cured EPDM membrane on a flat roof
(Admitted Prior Art).
Claims 9 to 11, 13, 14 and 16 to 30 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Hollis in view of McCarville, Davis, Cardinal and the Admitted
Prior Art.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and
the appellants regarding the above-noted rejection, we make reference to the answer
(Paper No. 17, mailed May 23, 2002) for the examiner's complete reasoning in support
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007