Appeal No. 2004-0837
Application No. 09/778,481
an angle of belt wrap around the sheave, and
a worst case loading on a plurality of portions of the belt;
(B) determining a portion of the belt that is most likely to
wear based upon the consideration from step (A); and
(C) positioning an inspection device relative to the belt
and spaced from the sheave such that the inspection device is
capable of gathering wear information regarding the portion of
the belt from step (B) when the portion is spaced away from the
sheave.
The examiner relies on the following prior art:
Yamagami 4,145,920 Mar. 27, 1979
Hirama et al. (Hirama) 4,427,940 Jan. 24, 1984
Saito 5,025,893 Jun. 25, 1991
The appellants’ admission at page 1 of the specification
(hereinafter referred to as “admitted prior art”).
The appealed claims stand rejected as follows:
I) Claims 1 through 19 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph,
as lacking written descriptive support in the application
disclosure as originally filed for the subject matter
presently claimed;
II) Claims 1 through 22 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph,
as lacking a disclosure enabling one of ordinary skill in
the art to make and/or use the claimed subject matter;
III) Claims 1, 2 and 4 through 22 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
unpatentable over the combined teachings of Yamagami, Hirama
and the admitted prior art; and
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007