Appeal No. 2003-1953 Page 4
Application 09/244,742
in and of itself, provides sufficient information to allow one of ordinary skill in the art to
conclude that the cutting edge is located in a pocket of the blade defined by “a plurality
of interior side walls . . . extending from said second face toward said first face to . . . an
intermediate face” of the blade as is required by each of the independent claims. In this
regard, we find no support in the reference for the figure added by the examiner on the
sheet of marked-up drawings attached to the Answer, which is purported to show side
walls at 5, for no such side walls are shown in Figure 2 of the reference, described as “a
vertical cross-section of a portion of the machine,” which would be expected to show a
side wall at the end of a pocket if such an element existed. In addition, the claim
requires that the cutting edge be “surrounded at the lower end . . . by the massive
portion of said cutting blade” (emphasis added), a limitation which, in our view, cannot
reliably be found in the reference.
Since Walker fails to disclose or teach all of the subject matter required by
independent claims 8, 10 and 13, the rejection of these claims cannot be sustained. It
follows that the like rejection of dependent claims 3, 5, 9, 11, 12, 14 and 15 also cannot
be sustained.
The Rejections Under Section 103
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007