Appeal No. 2003-0534 Page 2
Application No. 09/650,014
BACKGROUND
The appellants' invention relates to a reciprocating slat conveyor having a first
set of slats for conveying a load and a second set of slats for lifting and holding the load
while the set of conveying slats retract (specification, p. 1). A copy of the claims under
appeal is set forth in the appendix to the appellants' brief.
Claims 1 to 11 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, for
being incomplete.
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. 12, mailed November 8, 2002) for the examiner's complete reasoning in
support of the rejection, and to the brief (Paper No. 11, filed October 29, 2002) and
reply brief (Paper No. 13, filed December 11, 2002) for the appellants' arguments
thereagainst.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given careful consideration to
the appellants' specification and claims, and to the respective positions articulated by
the appellants and the examiner. As a consequence of our review, we will not sustain
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007