Ex Parte Slabbinck et al - Page 10



            Appeal 2007-1719                                                                               
            Application 10/655,483                                                                         
                         language in light of the corresponding structure, material,                       
                         or acts described therein, and equivalents thereof, to the                        
                         extent that the specification provides such disclosure.                           
                         Paragraph six does not state or even suggest that the PTO                         
                         is exempt from this mandate, and there is no legislative                          
                         history indicating that Congress intended that the PTO                            
                         should be.                                                                        
            Id., 29 USPQ2d 1848-49.  As such, we construe the limitation at issue, i.e., “means            
            for supporting the divider at the cutting platform” in light of the corresponding              
            structure described in Appellants’ Specification to encompass the combination of               
            support arm 16, link 22, and U-shaped bracket 20, and equivalents thereof (See                 
            e.g., Specification 2:29-30 and 4:29-35).                                                      
                  As shown clearly in Figure 3 of Greiner, the bracket 34 is connected to the              
            crop guide means 38 of the crop guide apparatus 22 and not to the row crop                     
            dividers 12, 14 of the harvesting attachment 10 (Finding of Fact 6).  Similarly, as            
            shown in Figure 4 of Greiner, the flange 30 is attached to the support posts 24 of             
            crop guide apparatus 22 and not to the row crop dividers 12, 14 of the harvesting              
            attachment 10 (Finding of Fact 7).  As such, the bracket and flange arrangement of             
            Greiner supports the crop guide members 38 of the crop guide apparatus 22, and                 
            the Examiner erred in finding that Greiner’s bracket and flange arrangement is the             
            link (claims 1 and 9) or supporting means (claim 16) that supports the crop divider            
            at the cutting platform, as claimed.                                                           
                  As such, Greiner does not teach or suggest a crop divider pivotable between              
            a forward operating position and a retracted transport position or supported at a              
            cutting platform by a link or support means.  The Examiner relies on Hurlburt and              

                                                    10                                                     



Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next

Last modified: September 9, 2013