Appeal No. 97-3752 Page 10
Application No. 08/293,322
first knife means is arranged to be "fixed" and the second
knife means is arranged to be "driven." 3
Based on our analysis and review of Townsend and claims 3
and 4, it is our opinion that one difference is the limitation
that the second knife means is arranged to be "driven."
With regard to this difference, the examiner determined
(answer, pp. 4-5) that the limitation arranged to be "driven"
is (1) inferentially recited in the claims and consequently,
this limitation is not given patentable consideration, and (2)
obvious since a driven skinner blade is known.
The appellants argue (brief, pp. 11-12 and reply brief,
pp. 3-4) that the claimed second knife means being arranged to
be "driven" is (1) not disclosed in Townsend, and (2) not
suggested by a driven skinner blade.
3"Driven" as used in the appellants' specification means
that the second knife means is moving (e.g., oscillating)
while cutting. "Fixed" as used in the appellants'
specification means that the first knife means is not moving
while cutting.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007