Ex Parte Roth et al - Page 4

                    Appeal No. 2004-1211                                                                                                                                  
                    Application No. 09/945,418                                                                                                                            

                    wrapper assembly and wrapping structure simply are not located                                                                                        
                    entirely behind the baler as required by the claim before us.1                                                                                        

                              For this reason alone, the Examiner’s § 102 rejection of                                                                                    
                    claim 1 is being anticipated by Hood cannot be sustained.                                                                                             
                              The decision of the Examiner is reversed.                                                                                                   
                                                                               REVERSED                                                                                   


                                                  BRADLEY R. GARRIS                                          )                                                            
                                                  Administrative Patent Judge                                )                                                            
                                                                                                             )                                                            
                                                                                                             )                                                            
                                                                                                             )                                                            
                                                                                                             ) BOARD OF PATENT                                            
                                                  PETER F. KRATZ                                             )     APPEALS                                                
                                                  Administrative Patent Judge                                )       AND                                                  
                                                                                                             )  INTERFERENCES                                             
                                                                                                             )                                                            
                                                                                                             )                                                            
                                                                                                             )                                                            
                                                  JEFFREY T. SMITH                                           )                                                            
                                                  Administrative Patent Judge                                )                                                            

                    BRG/jrg                                                                                                                                               



                              1 This claim distinction is graphically illustrated by a                                                                                    
                    comparison of Hoods Figure 1 with the sole Figure of Appellants                                                                                       
                    application wherein the wrapping apparatus 14 is shown as being                                                                                       
                    located entirely behind baler 12 including the rear section or                                                                                        
                    discharge gate 20 thereof.                                                                                                                            
                                                                                    44                                                                                    




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  Next 

Last modified: November  3, 2007