Appeal No. 2005-0614
Application No. 09/171,735
into sections having a desired finished coil weight after said step
of rolling the continuous intermediate strip through the second
deformation stage; and
changing the metallurgical characteristics of the continuous
intermediate strip by temperature control prior to said step of
coiling the continuous intermediate strip and speed control of said
continuous intermediate strip through the second deformation stage.
The reference set forth below is relied upon by the Examiner
as evidence of obviousness:
Nitou et al. (Nitou) JP 59-092103 May 28, 1984
All of the appealed claims are rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as being unpatentable over Nitou.2
We refer to the brief and to the answer for a complete
exposition of the opposing viewpoints expressed by the Appellants
and by the Examiner concerning this rejection.
OPINION
For the reasons set forth below, we will sustain this
rejection.
In the answer, the Examiner identifies a number of features
recited in appealed independent claim 6 which he considers to
distinguish over the Nitou reference. However, in their brief,
2 On page 3 of the brief, the Appellants indicate that the
appealed claims will stand or fall together. Accordingly, in
assessing the merits of the above noted rejection, we will focus
only on claim 6 which is the sole independent claim before us.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007