Appeal No. 2002-1023 Page 6
Application No. 09/387,399
the web material itself. Thus, this reference would not have suggested to one of
ordinary skill in the art that the speed of the web material be adjusted by altering the
speed of the wetting roller, much less that an upstream web feeding component be
adjustable with respect to a downstream web feeding component to vary the
characteristics of the material.
Contrary to the position taken by the examiner, we therefore fail to perceive any
teaching, suggestion or incentive in Beierlorzer which would have led one of ordinary
skill in the art to provide the Baumuller machine with an adjustable speed control for
varying the ratio of the speeds of the upstream and downstream feeding components to
vary a characteristic of the strip of cushioning, as is required in claim 7.
Furthermore, we agree with the appellants that their statements in lines 3-5 of
page 18 of the specification are not an admission that it was known at the time of their
invention to locate an adjustable speed control member outside of the housing. From
our perspective, one of ordinary skill in the art would have understood from this
passage that the phrase “in a well known manner” refers to the manner in which the
speed ratio can be varied, such as by means of the quick change gear sets, motor
speed controls, and variable pitch pulley assemblies that have been disclosed in the
specification, and not to the positioning of the speed control outside of the housing.
For the reasons set forth above, it is our conclusion that the combined teachings
of Baumuller and Beierlorzer, taken with lines 3-5 of page 18 of the appellants’
specification, fail to establish a prima facie case of obviousness with regard to the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007