Appeal No. 97-1224
Application 08/445,866
OPINION
After consideration of the positions and arguments presented
by both the examiner and the appellants, we have concluded that
the rejection should not be sustained. Our reasons for this
decision follow.
The appellants’ invention requires that a cutting blade move
in first and second longitudinal directions which are transverse
of one another in order to cut out a rectangular opening in a
cardboard blank, and that the blade be oblique to the blank to
create a beveled edge. The blade must smoothly enter and exit
the blank, and must be reoriented with respect to the blank in
order to make the transverse cuts. This rejection is based upon
the examiner’s belief that the specification does not enable one
of ordinary skill in the art to make and use the invention, in
that no structure is disclosed for performing these two tasks.
According to the examiner, “there is no structure set forth for
the blade performing a penetration movement obliquely downwardly
into the cardboard and a return or retraction movement,” or for
“raising the blade and reorienting the knife at a new oblique
angle to perform a transverse cut” (Answer, pages 2 and 3).
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007