Appeal 2006-2744
Application 09/664,794
Patent 5,584,962
2. On March 2, 1995, claim 11 and other claims were rejected over
prior art which included U.S. Patent No. 4,619,728 to Brink.
3. On July 5, 1995, Appellants filed a response to this prior art
rejection which included an amendment adding a pre-tensioning
means limitation to claim 11 and which included an argument that this
limitation rendered claim 11 patentable over the prior art including the
Brink patent. Amended claim 11 is reproduced below3 wherein the
pre-tensioning means limitation is recited in clause (g):
Claim 11 (Amended) An applicator and adhesive transfer
device comprising:
(a) an upper frame member having opposite sides and a lower
frame member having opposite sides, said upper frame member
being pivotally connected to said lower frame member;
(b) a first nip roller rotatively mounted and extending between
the sides of said upper frame member;
(c) [a] first mounting means assisted with the upper frame
member;
(d) a second-nip roller rotatively mounted and extending
between the sides of said lower frame member;
(e) [a] second mounting means associated with the said lower
frame member;
[and]
3 Underlined matter was added by the amendment, and [bracketed] matter
was deleted by the amendment.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013