Appeal No. 2006-0235
Application 09/733,352
3, lines 26-28, of Knowles (answer, pages 5-6). The examiner concludes that the apparatus of
the claimed method and that of Knowles both work on the principle that capstan speed affects
the tension of the optical fiber and thus, the speed of a capstan can be changed to control the
tension of the fiber (id., pages 6-7).
Appellants submit that Knowles does not “suggest that a load cell should be used to
monitor fiber tension during the draw process” and adjust the speed of a capstan based on the
feedback from the load cell, contending that in the claimed invention encompassed by claim 1,
“the circumferential speed of [the] screener capstan is adjusted in response to [the] monitored
tension” and the term “‘[m]onitor’ is defined in the American Heritage Dictionary as ‘to
scrutinize or check systematically with a view to collecting certain specified categories of data’”9
(reply brief, page 4, underline emphasis appellants’; brief, page 5). Appellants point to a specific
embodiment of monitoring tension with a particular load cell arrangement and using the
feedback to adjust capstan speed and thus, fiber tension (specification, page 10, ll. 26-29, and
page 11, ll. 7-9), arguing that “in applicants’ case, an electronic device keeps track of the
tension, and collects information about the tension which is then used to adjust the
circumferential speed of said screener capstan, depending on whether the tension is too high or
too low,” while Knowles does not do so (reply brief, pages 4-5; brief, page 5).
The examiner points out that appellants do “not give any indication as to why Knowles
use of the load cell to indicate the tension does not read on the claimed ‘monitoring’ of the
tension” (answer, page 10).
We find in Knowles substantial evidence supporting the examiner’s position. We
interpret the claim language “fiber tension between said capstans is monitored during the draw
via a load cell” to involve any manner of monitoring by any manner of load cell (see above p.3).
In the context of the claim language and in light of the use of the term in the written description
in the specification, the term “monitored” has the customary dictionary meaning pointed to by
appellants. The difficulty that we have with appellants’ position is, as the examiner points out,
the absence of argument establishing that the load cell and the subsequent use of feedback
9 The American Heritage Dictionary, Second College Edition 810; see also The American
Heritage Dictionary Of The English Language 1136 (4th ed., Boston, Houghton Mifflin
Company. 2000).
- 7 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007