Ex parte Slagowski et al.

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

Mar 18, 2002

08696248 (B.P.A.I. Mar. 18, 2002)

The opinion in support of the decision being entered today was not written
for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.
Paper No. 14
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________
Ex parte
EUGENE L. SLAGOWSKI
and PAUL MCCARTEN
Appeal No. 1999-0984
Application No. 08/696,248
ON BRIEF
Before WALTZ, LIEBERMAN AND KRATZ, Administrative Patent Judges.
LIEBERMAN, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is an appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the rejection of the examiner
refusing to allow claims 1 through 6, which are all the claims pending in this application.
Appeal No. 1999-0984 2
Application No. 08/696,248

THE INVENTION
The invention is directed to a blanket material and a process for its preparation, for
an extended nip press wherein short fibers are embedded in a two component polyurethane
coating aligned in a cross-machine direction. Additional limitations are described in the
following illustrative claims.
THE CLAIMS
Claims 1and 3 are illustrative of appellants’ invention and are reproduced below.
1. A blanket for an extended nip press comprising:
a blanket material forming a loop of a selected cross-machine dimension and a selected
circumferential dimension, and
a two component polyurethane resin impregnating the loop and forming a coating thereon,
the polyurethane resin having short fibers embedded therein, the fibers being
substantially aligned with the cross-machine direction, the fibers being in sufficient quantities
to provide significant structural reinforcement of the urethane in the cross-machine
direction, wherein the coating has portions defining a plurality of parallel grooves extending
about the loop in the machine direction, and wherein the short fiber reinforcement
reinforces the urethane to prevent the grooves from collapsing under the applied loads of
an extended nip press.
3. A method of forming a press blanket for an extended nip press comprising the steps of:
looping a bare fabric substrate around two support rollers, the rollers defining a top run
region between the two support rollers;
Appeal No. 1999-0984 3
Application No. 08/696,248
dispensing a two-component polyurethane to a dispenser head which is closely spaced
from the substrate surface;
moving the dispenser head across the substrate in the cross-machine direction, and
dispensing the two-component polyurethane onto the substrate;
conducting to the dispenser head fibers from a fiber supply;
introducing the fibers into the polyurethane as the polyurethane leaves the dispenser head,
such that the fibers are aligned as they leave the nozzle in the direction of the
motion of the dispenser head;
moving the looped substrate in a machine-direction with respect to the dispenser head to
apply the polyurethane-fiber mix to the entire substrate;
grinding the substrate to a consistent thickness; and
milling grooves into the polyurethane layer.
THE REFERENCES OF RECORD
As evidence of obviousness, the examiner relies upon the following references.
Beucker 4,353,296 Oct. 12, 1982
Adams 4,552,620 Nov. 12, 1985
McCarten 4,944,820 July 31, 1990
WO ‘16820 95/16820 June 22, 1995
(Published International Application)
Appeal No. 1999-0984 4
Application No. 08/696,248
THE REJECTIONS

Claims 1 through 6 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103(a) as being unpatentable
over Adams in view of McCarten, and/or Beucker and/or WO ‘16820.

OPINION
We have carefully considered all of the arguments advanced by the appellants and the
examiner and agree with the appellants that the rejection of the claims under § 103(a) is
not well founded. Accordingly, we reverse this rejection.
Rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a).
Adams is directed to a paper machine belt, spray coated on one or both sides with a
urethane coating which impregnates and seals the blanket. See column 1, lines 7-14. We
find that the urethane disclosed by Adams is a two component urethane resin. See column
1, lines 46-49. We find that the surface of the urethane base can be ground to a polished
finish and grooved to discharge water. See column 1, lines 54-60. We find that the
urethane resin is applied by a spray gun mounted over the traveling run of the blanket to
Appeal No. 1999-0984 5
Application No. 08/696,248
traverse the width of the blanket and discharge a two-component urethane resin. See
column 2, lines 19-22. We find that the two component urethane resin mix is forced from
a tank through a nozzle to eject a wide narrow jet of the urethane material. See column 5,
lines 58-61. We further find that, “a screw rod 68 is driven at a speed to move the spray
nozzle traversely across the top face of the run 61 to cover the entire width of the blanket
base . . . .” See column 5, line 67 to column 6, line 1. We further find that the fabric
weave is such that there is good flexibility in the longitudinal direction and more rigidity in
the traverse direction. See column 3, lines 40-45. Indeed, it is an object of this invention
that the belts are rigid enough so that they will not crush under the loads and yet are pliable
enough to wrap around rolls. See column 1, lines 28-30. Accordingly, a requirement of
these blankets is that the longitudinal direction is flexible and the traverse direction is rigid.
Based upon the above findings, we conclude that Adam discloses each of the limitations of
the claimed subject matter other than the presence of fibers, let alone, “fibers being
substantially aligned with the cross machine direction,” or that, “the fibers are aligned as
they leave the nozzle in the direction of the dispenser head.” See claims 1 and 5
respectively. Indeed, there is no disclosure or suggestion in Adams that fibers may be
added to the blanket disclosed therein.
McCarten is likewise directed to a method for the formation of a blanket for a nip
press. Similar to Adams, we find that an object of McCarten’s invention lies in the
Appeal No. 1999-0984 6
Application No. 08/696,248
formation of a blanket wherein the anisotropic properties of the body permits flexure of the
band in the machine direction, longitudinally, while inhibiting closure of the grooves by
cross machine direction, traverse, of the band. See column 3, lines 1-8. We specifically
find that, “the anisotropic properties of the body permit flexure of the body in machine
direction during passage through the extended nip press while inhibiting closure of the
grooves by cross-machine direction flexure of the body thereby maintaining the drainage
capabilities of the grooves.” See column 4, lines 1-6 and column 5, lines 50-65. We
further find that McCarten discloses that the fibers are randomly oriented. See column 4,
lines 45-51. There is no disclosure in McCarten to align the fibers in any manner other
than randomly.
Beucker is directed to anisotropic rubber for nip rolls. We find that Beucker
discloses that an, “[a]lternate method of providing the higher modulus elasticity in the
transverse direction include the provision of acicula, fibers or cords as a component of the
elastomeric or rubber layers with the acicula, fibers or cords oriented in the transverse
direction . . . .” See column 3, lines 53-58. However, the physical properties of a rubber
roll are different and distinct from that of the two component polyurethane compositions of
the claimed subject matter. On the record before us, we find no suggestion or motivation
why one of ordinary skill in the art would have substituted fiber containing transversely
oriented two component polyurethane in place of fiber containing randomly oriented
Appeal No. 1999-0984 7
Application No. 08/696,248
polyurethane, based upon a teaching of a rubber elastomer. In particular the suggestion of
Beucker to calendar and stretch the elastomer material in one direction in sheet form,
column 1, lines 52-57, does not provide the requisite motivation to utilize the disclosed
Beucker’s stretching technique, for a two component urethane resin. Moreover, on the
record before us, we find no suggestion of introducing the fibers into the polyurethane as
the urethane leaves the dispenser head, as required by the method claims.
Finally, WO ‘16820 is directed to a method of making a shoe press belt by applying
a polymer coating to the base cloth wherein the polymer coating is impregnated with an
aramid, Kevlar, thixotrope. See Abstract, pages 1 and 2. However, WO ‘16820
specifically discloses that the fibers present are aligned in the direction of the applied shear,
page 2, as opposed to a transverse direction. Accordingly, the disclosure of WO ‘16820
fails to overcome the deficiencies of the other references.
DECISION
The rejection of claims 1 through 6 under 35 U.S.C. §103(a) as being
unpatentable over Adams in view of McCarten, and/or Beucker and/or WO’16820 is
reversed.
Appeal No. 1999-0984 8
Application No. 08/696,248
The decision of the examiner is reversed.
REVERSED
Appeal No. 1999-0984 9
Application No. 08/696,248
THOMAS A. WALTZ )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
PAUL LIEBERMAN ) APPEALS
Administrative Patent Judge ) AND
) INTERFERENCES
)
)
)
PETER F. KRATZ )
Administrative Patent Judge )
PL/lp
Appeal No. 1999-0984 10
Application No. 08/696,248
LATHROP CLARK
122 W WASHINGTON AVE.
P.O. BOX 1507
MADISON, WI 53701-1507
Letty
JUDGE LIEBERMAN
APPEAL NO. 1999-0984
APPLICATION NO. 08/696,248
APJ LIEBERMAN
APJ WALTZ
APJ KRATZ
DECISION: REVERSED
PREPARED: Nov 14, 2002
OB/HD
PALM
ACTS 2

DISK (FOIA)
REPORT
BOOK