Appeal No. 2003-0106
Application 09/502,680
With the above interpretation in mind, we look to the
examiner’s rejection of claims 21, 22 and 27 through 29 under
35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by Shannon. According to
the examiner (answer, page 3), Shannon teaches a method for
installing replaceable, elongated plates (12) on the blade (16)
of a plow or grader (22), wherein such method includes
the step of angularly adjusting the height of the holder
(34) incrementally and thereby the height of the at least
one plate incrementally (col. 4, lines 20-24).”
Further insight into the examiner’s position is found on
pages 5-6 of the answer, wherein the examiner urges that in
moving the holder (34) from the position seen in Figure 5 of
Shannon to that in Figure 6, “the steps of angularly adjusting
the height incrementally occurs.” More particularly, the examiner
contends that an ordinary definition of the term “incrementally”
must be used, and that such definition from the tenth edition of
the Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary is “the action or
process of increasing.” The examiner concludes by noting that
Shannon “teaches the act of increasing the height and angle of
the holder 34 from the position seen in fig. 5 to the position
seen in fig. 6” (answer, page 6).
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007