Appeal No. 2004-2196
Application 09/902,055
The examiner responds that Moriarity teaches at col. 6, lines 24-61, and FIGS. 2 and 3,
the limitations of appealed claim 1 at issue, pointing out in these respects the teaching at col. 6,
ll. 44-61 (answer, page 11). With respect to this latter disclosure, the examiner explains that the
same would have taught “rod heaters 136 and 138 which are embedded in the lip of [sic, the] die
body . . . increase or decrease the lip temperature in various longitudinal zones . . . [that]
increases the lateral fill in flow, which enables a higher pressure of polymer being extruded to act
upon the opposing surfaces of the die lips 112 and 114 in the area of the higher temperature,
causing a very slight additional flexure in the flexure zone 117 of the die lip 114 in the affected
area to extrude more polymer therethrough” (id., pages 11-12). The examiner thus finds that “as
a result of the temperature changes in the die body (the heaters are embedded, and therefore,
inside the die body), the die lip, which is an integral part of the die body, is flexed in zones across
the lip” (id., page 12). The examiner contends that “the common understanding of the meaning
of the term flexing would be that the term means ‘bending,’” and because “the die lip is an
integral part of the die body, as shown by Figure 2, . . . a bending of a portion of the die lip is a
bending of a portion of the die body” (id.). The examiner thus contends that Moriarity teaches
the claim limitations “regardless of the actual terminology used to described these features, such
as the term ‘flexure’ rather than ‘bending’” (id.). The examiner submits that the “‘transverse’
component of the bending requirement” is shown by the combination of Ludwig and Moriarity,
because the placement of the die “facing counterpressure roller 4” in Ludwig would result in “the
bending of the lip in the various longitudinal zones . . . [being] perpendicular to the radius of the
counterpressure roll” (id.).
The examiner further finds that Ludwig does not teach away from bending the die body as
taught by Moriarty, because Ludwig discloses the requirements of the coating head and the
counterpressure cylinder, and “[t]here is nothing in the teaching or requirements of Ludwig that
would prevent there from being the slight flexure described at the lip area” of the die of Moriarty
as “[b]oth references are concerned with extruding heated polymer materials from the slits of
extrudes to provide uniform coating (id., page 13). In this respect, the examiner finds that
“[w]hile Ludwig provides a contact area between the coating head surface and the cylinder, there
- 5 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007