Application of Arbeit

'O’CONNELL, Judge

(concurring in part, and dissenting in part).

I agree that the decision of the Board of Appeals should be affirmed as to the rejection of claims 1, 37, 38 and 39, and reversed as to claims 31 and 33.

The disallowance of claims 43, 44, 45 and 46 should likewise be reversed. The gist of the invention, for all furnaces regardless of their shapes and rates of production, is based upon the prevention by the employment of velocity, or rate of flow, as the effective means of preventing back flow of glass from one to another. The patentability of the principle involved was acknowledged…