Appeal No. 2004-0170
Application No. 09/288,450
rolling mill” (specification, page 2). Representative claim 1
reads as follows:1
1. A shear for subdividing an elongated product moving
longitudinally in a plane, said shear comprising:
leader and follower blades mounted on rotors for rotation
about parallel axes located on opposite sides of said plane, said
blades being arranged to coact in a radially overlapping
relationship at a cutting zone located between said axes and
spaced vertically from said plane, the radius of rotation of said
leader blade being longer than the radius of rotation of said
follower blade;
means for continuously rotating said blades at equal angular
velocities, with said leader blade preceding said follower blade
in said cutting zone; and
switch means located upstream of said cutting zone, said
switch means being operable in a first mode to direct said
product along a path in said plane bypassing said cutting zone,
and being operable in a second mode in concert with one of said
rotors to deflect said product from said path and said plane into
said cutting zone for cutting by said blades into leading and
trailing segments, said blades being constructed and arranged to
further deflect a tail end of said leading segment away from said
plane while directing a front end of said trailing segment back
to said plane.
THE PRIOR ART
The references relied on by the examiner to support the
final rejection are:
Obinata 4,202,230 May 13, 1980
Omori et al. (Omori) 4,399,727 Aug. 23, 1983
1 The terms “said path” in claim 15 (three occurrences, the
last of which should apparently be --said plane--) and “said
cutting zones” in claim 16 lack a proper antecedent basis. These
informalities should be corrected in the event of further
prosecution.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007