Ex Parte Lamport - Page 3

                Appeal 2006-2137                                                                                 
                Application 10/375,748                                                                           
                       38.         The method of claim 24 wherein placing the slurry                             
                       composition in a die cavity includes the die cavity having a top-                         
                       facing opening with the sidewall being vertically-oriented, and                           
                       wherein pressing on the slurry is by pressing the die punch                               
                       downward on a top surface of the slurry composition to force                              
                       the solids toward a bottom of the die cavity while extracting the                         
                       water upward through the gap between the vertically-oriented                              
                       sidewall and the punch and out of the top-facing opening of the                           
                       die cavity.                                                                               
                                                                                                                
                II.  PRIOR ART                                                                                   
                       As evidence of unpatentability of the claimed subject matter, the                         
                Examiner relies upon the following references:                                                   
                MacMurray    US 2,697,979   Dec. 28, 1954                                                        
                Tabe    US 4,324,706   Apr. 13, 1982                                                             
                Parker   US 4,656,203   Apr. 7, 1987                                                             

                III.  REJECTION                                                                                  
                       Claims 24 through 47 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as                           
                unpatentable over the combined disclosures of Parker, Tabe and                                   
                MacMurray.                                                                                       

                IV.  FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS                                                                    
                       We have carefully considered the claims, specification and prior art                      
                references, including the arguments advanced by both the Appellant and the                       
                Examiner in support of their respective positions.  This review has led us to                    
                conclude that the Examiner’s § 103 rejection is well founded.  Accordingly,                      
                we will sustain the Examiner’s decision rejecting claims 24 through 47                           



                                                       3                                                         


Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007