Appeal No. 2004-0864
Application No. 09/850,924
than this zone when the mounting frame 30 is in a raised, non-
working position, as depicted in Figure 2.
Although appellants have amended original claim 8 by
removing the term “entirely”, the amended claim still requires
conveyor arrangement 32 be located within a zone between the
ground wheels and the rear portion of the mounting frame when the
mounting frame is in the working position (Figure 1).
Upon our review of the entire record, we determine that
conveying arrangement 32 is within the aforementioned zone.
When the mounting frame 30 is in its working position (Figure 1),
it is accurate to say that the mounting frame 30 is within the
zone bounded at its front side by ground wheels 16, and at a rear
side by a rear portion 34 of the mounting frame.
It is noteworthy to point out that the zone itself has not
changed by the amendment made by appellants, i.e., the zone still
is between ground wheels 16 and rear portion 34. The amendment
simply expresses that the conveying arrangement 32 is within this
zone.
We therefore conclude that amended claim 8 is supported by
the original disclosure.
In view of the above, we reverse the 35 U.S.C. § 112, first
paragraph (written description), rejection of claims 8 through
10.
II. The 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) rejection of claims 1 through 3
-5-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007