Appeal No. 2004-0864
Application No. 09/850,924
said windrower such that said conveying arrangement is
located within a zone bounded at a front side by said
ground wheels and bounded at a rear side by a rear
portion of said mounting frame when said mounting frame
is in said working position; and said conveying
arrangement is located no further rearward than said
zone when said mounting frame is in said raised non-
working position.
The examiner relies on the following references as evidence
of unpatentability:
Welsch et al. (Welsch) 6,145,289 Nov. 14, 20001
(filed Feb. 01, 1999)
Claims 8 through 10 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112,
first paragraph (written description).
Claims 1 through 3 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b)
as being anticipated by Welsch.
On page 6 of the answer, the examiner indicates that claims
4 through 7 contain allowable subject matter.
1 We observe that the present application has a U.S. filing date of May
8, 2001. Welsch has a publication date of November 14, 2000, and was
filed in the United States on February 1, 1999, and has a foreign
priority date of February 4, 1998. Hence, it appears that Welsch is
applicable under 102(e) rather than 102(b). However, we reverse the
instant anticipation rejection for other reasons, stated, infra.
-3-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007