Ex Parte Anderson et al - Page 2

                Appeal 2007-0487                                                                                 
                Application 09/759,993                                                                           
                       Appellants present an application for a patent directed to a method                       
                and apparatus for removing an adhesive film from a substrate.  Appellants                        
                indicate that the disclosed apparatus is useful for removing an adhesive film                    
                from a substrate having a large area, such as a building or a side of a truck,                   
                etc. (Specification 2 and 3).  Claim 221 is reproduced below:                                    
                             22. An apparatus for removing adhesive film from a                                  
                       substrate, the apparatus comprising:                                                      
                                    a winding roll attached to a frame, the winding roll                         
                       comprising a longitudinal axis;                                                           
                                    a motor operably connected to the winding roll for                           
                       rotating the winding roll about its longitudinal axis; and                                
                                    a support roll rotatably attached to the frame, the support                  
                       roll located a fixed distance from the winding roll, wherein the                          
                       winding roll and the support roll are arranged on the frame such that                     
                       tension applied to an adhesive film during removal of the adhesive                        
                       film from the substrate is transferred to the substrate through the                       
                support roll, and wherein the support roll is not located at a release line of                   
                the adhesive film.                                                                               
                       The Examiner relies on the following prior art references as evidence                     
                in rejecting the appealed claims:                                                                
                Appollonio          FR 2 643 487 A1         Aug. 24, 1990                                        
                Stadtmueller          US 5,891,297          Apr. 6, 1999                                         
                Kuroda          US 5,891,298          Apr. 6, 1999                                               

                       Claims 1, 4, 8-13, 17, 21, 22 and 25 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.                       
                § 102(b) as being anticipated by Apollonio (French Patent Publication                            
                2 643 487).  Claims 1, 5, 8-10, 12, 18, and 22 stand rejected under                              
                                                                                                                
                1 The copy of claim 22 presented in Appendix A of the Brief erroneously                          
                includes the words “as compression” in the penultimate line thereof.                             
                                                       2                                                         

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

Last modified: September 9, 2013