Appeal No. 2004-2284
Application 09/832,873
transporting the loosened and distributed highly consistent fibrous paper stock into a
dispersing machine;
dispersing the transported loosened and distributed highly consistent fibrous paper stock
in the dispersing machine.
The references relied on by the examiner are:
Davenport 6,045,070 Apr. 4, 2000
Riquet 1.239.047 Jul. 11, 1960
(French Patent)
Aktiebolag 2 364 289 Apr. 7, 1978
(published French Patent Application)
Egenes et al. (Egenes) WO 96/18769 Jun. 20, 1996
(published World Intellectual Property Organization Application)
Kriebel et al. (Kriebel ‘653) 197 12 653 Oct. 1, 1998
(German Offenlegungsschrift)
The examiner also relies on the following reference “as an equivalent translation” of
Kriebel ‘653 (answer, pages 3 and 4; see also final rejection, mailed October 21, 2002, page 5),
which appellants do not dispute in the reply brief:
Kriebel et al. (Kriebel ‘573) 6,250,573 Jun. 26, 2001
(filed Mar. 24, 1998)
The examiner has advanced the following grounds of rejection on appeal:1
claims 1, 5 through 7 and 13 through 16 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
obvious over Egenes in view of Riquet2 with or without Aktiebolag3 (answer, pages 4);
claims 2 through 4 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Egenes in
view of Riquet with or without Aktiebolag as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Kriebel
‘6534 (answer, pages 4-5); and
claims 8 through 12 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Egenes
in view of Riquet with or without Aktiebolag as applied to claim 1, and further in view of
Davenport with or without Kriebel ‘653 (answer, page 5).
1 The examiner withdrew the ground of rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, in
the answer (page 2).
2 We refer in our decision to the translation of Riquet prepared by the Translation Branch of the
Scientific and Technical Information Center (STIC) of the USPTO in August 2003 (PTO
2003-4806).
3 We have considered the translation of Aktiebolag prepared by the Translation Branch of the
STIC of the USPTO in August 2003 (PTO 2003-4808).
4 We refer in our decision to Kriebel ‘573 because the examiner relies thereon as a translation of
Kriebel ‘653.
- 2 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007