Appeal 2007-0130
Application 10/688,584
1 Chauffoureaux US 4,003,554 Jan. 18, 1977
2 Gerling US 4,326,114 Apr. 20, 1982
3 Wear US 4,640,020 Feb. 3, 1987
4
5 The Examiner found that Chauffoureaux discloses the invention as
6 claimed except that Chauffoureaux does not disclose a plurality of
7 microwave guides. The Examiner relies on Wear for teaching a plurality of
8 microwave guides.
9 The Examiner relies on Gerling for teaching that the treatment section
10 may be tilted as required by claim 3 and for teaching a modular device as
11 required by claim 4.
12 Appellants contend Chauffoureaux is not prior art and further that
13 Chauffoureaux does not disclose a dryer but rather an extruder.
14 Appellants also contend that Chauffoureaux does not include an
15 unloading zone or a reciprocating ram.
16 Appellants further contend that the Examiner erred in his holding that
17 the claimed subject matter would have been obvious because Chauffoureaux
18 teaches that one would not want to include a plurality of microwave guides
19 because such would create hot spots.
20 Appellants also contend that a person of ordinary skill in the art would
21 not have found the subject matter of claims 3-6 obvious in view of the
22 teachings of Chauffoureaux in view of Wear and Gerling because Gerling
23 discloses that only the tube is tilted not the entire oven.
24
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013