Appeal No. 2002-2132
Application 09/124,907
tensioning member which secures the trailing edge by providing
“force in at least a direction tangential to the cylinder.”2
The appellant’s position here is not persuasive. Figure 11
in the Duckett reference clearly shows the presence of a gap
between the bottom portions of the outer surfaces 54A of flanges
31A and 32A which embody the leading and trailing ends of
Duckett’s shell member (die-cutting mat 26). Duckett’s tool
accommodating cutouts 62A also define a gap between the leading
and trailing edges of the shell member. The appellant’s
contention that any gap in the Duckett device would not allow for
a knife assembly or anvil bar to be positioned therein is of no
moment since claim 23 does not so limit the recited gap.
Furthermore, Duckett’s tensioning member (locking wedge 35A)
provides “force in at least a direction tangential to the
cylinder” as evidenced by Duckett’s disclosure that rotation of
the locking wedge simultaneously moves the outer edges 37A of the
mat firmly against each other whereby a single line contact 40A
is established. Such movement, which is tangential to the
cylinder, necessarily involves a force in at least a direction
tangential to the cylinder.
2 Claim 23 does not include the “biased” base limitation
found in claims 1 and 17 through 19.
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007