Appeal No. 2005-1435
Application No. 09/906,564
applicant’s specification may be used in determining the
patentability of a claimed invention); See also In re Davis, 305
F.2d 501, 503, 134 USPQ 256, 258 (CCPA 1962).
With these precedents in mind, we turn to the examiner’s
section 103 rejections. The examiner finds that Ito teaches “an
injection molding machine for discharging purged resin through a
port located above a collecting surface so that streams of
discharged resin [are] collect[ed] [as] a puddle mass on the
surface, see Fig. 13 and col. 8, lines 18-20.” See the Answer,
page 3. Consistent with this finding, the appellant states
(Specification, page 4) that:
An injection machine normally has a purge port
from which there is a discharge of plastic during a
purge cycle required to clear the internal chambers
when shutting down or changing over resins. According
to one aspect of the invention, such purge resin is
utilized as a preform for constructing a decorative
article to gain value from the material and avoid the
need to regrinding to recycle the material or to
dispose of the same in a landfill. [Emphasis added.]
The appellant also acknowledges that clear and tinted high
strength polycarbonates of the type used for automotive glazing
are known to be purged from an injection molding machine. See
the specification, pages 1 and 2. Implicit in these statements
is that the appellant’s invention lies in using the preform
resulting from conventionally discharged and collected purged
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007