Appeal 2007-0726
Application 10/264,561
14. Lanner’s continuous coating process is an improvement over the
batch process of Mochizuki (Lanner, col. 1, l. 19 to col. 2, l. 9).
Lanner’s improvement is directed to the apparatus used to convey
the cores, Lanner using a tumbling bed that allows continuous
treating of the cores. (Lanner, col. 1, ll. 28-30; see also Mochizuki,
col. 4, ll. 24-27 and Lanner, Fig. 1A; col. 2, l. 60 to col. 3, l. 15).
15. Lanner and Mochizuki suggest baking or frying the coated cores
(Lanner, col. 1, ll. 30-31; Mochizuki, col. 4, ll. 28-30; Lanner, col.
6, l. 66 to col. 7, l. 3).
16. The coater device of Lanner is a tumbler coater (Lanner, col. 3, ll.
4-10). Lanner exemplifies a rotating drum (id., Fig. 1A-B) and
troughs with internal augers (Lanner, col. 3, ll. 16-33). Rotating
pans are also mentioned (id.). There is no mention of a continuous
belt or belt coater in Lanner.
17. Rotating drums and pans are different from belt coaters as
evidenced from Appellants’ Specification (Specification ¶ 55).
Appellants’ Specification discusses conventional tumbling bed
coating equipment such as pan coaters, revolving pans, or rotating
drums (Specification ¶ 55) and separately discusses an alternative
“conventional belt coater” (id.). According to the Specification a
belt coater employs a continuous belt to tumble a bed of edible
cores (id.).
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013