Ex Parte Solon - Page 2




          Appeal No. 2004-0572                                                        
          Application 09/849,315                                                      



                    The subject matter on appeal relates to a method of               
          storing and handling rubber salvaged from discarded tire                    
          carcasses.  The method includes the steps of cutting the tire               
          carcasses into flat tire strips excluding sidewalls and stacking            
          the flat strips onto pallets in a plurality of abutting rubber-             
          to-rubber contact configurations.  Further details of this                  
          appealed subject matter are set forth in representative                     
          independent claims 1 and 24, which read as follows1:                        
                    1.  The environmentally safe method of storing and                
          handling batches of rubber pieces salvaged from discarded tire              
          carcasses in a bulk storage configuration obtained at low cost              
          for compact storage of residual bulk rubber at bulk storage sites           
          from which bulk rubber may be reclaimed in due course for                   
          preparation of rubber products, comprising in combination the               
          steps of:  cutting reclaimed tire carcasses into sets of                    
          substantially flat storable sections of tire tread strips                   
          excluding sidewalls, preparing pallets with loading platform                
          areas of specified length and width dimensions for retaining a              
          plurality of stacks of said substantially flat sections in a                
          storage configuration, and stacking a plurality of the storable             
          sections into said stacks in compact rubber-to-rubber interfacing           
          configurations with frictional resistance against movement of the           



          1 We observe that the appellant has inaccurately reproduced                 
          the appealed claims in the Appendix of the Brief filed March 27,            
          2003.  For example, the claim 24 reproduction in this Appendix              
          contains numerous errors of omission and in content.  No useful             
          purpose would be served by identifying these reproduction errors.           
          Suffice it to say, therefore, that our disposition of this appeal           
          is based upon the actual language of the appealed claims pending            
          in this application.                                                        
                                          2                                           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007