Appeal No. 2005-1843 Page 2
Application No. 09/585,222
BACKGROUND
The appellant's invention relates generally to barstock body valves and the size
of barstock required, and particularly to the size and weight reduction achievable
through eccentric (or off-center) machining of the barstock to create the valve body's
flow passage. An eccentrically located flow passage results in a thinner wall adjacent to
the flow passage, and an initially smaller barstock size (specification, p. 1). A copy of
the claims under appeal is set forth in the appendix to the appellant's brief.
The prior art references of record relied upon by the examiner in rejecting the
appealed claims are:
Matousek 4,026,516 May 31, 1977
Dicky 5,944,055 Aug. 31, 1999
The rejections set forth in the final rejection (mailed January 28, 2005) are as
follows:
Claims 1, 2, 5 and 7 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by Matousek;
Claim 6 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by or, in the alternative, under
35 U.S.C. § 103 as obvious over Matousek; and
Claims 3 and 8 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Matousek in view of
Dicky.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007