Appeal No. 1998-1803
Application 08/409,188
that a desired pattern to be cut from sheet material which is
shown on a display can also be projected directly onto the
fabric. It is the examiner’s position that it would have been
obvious to the artisan to replace the template display of
Campbell with the projection system of Gerber [answer, pages
3-4].
With respect to the independent claims, appellant makes
several arguments of which the following are considered to be
most pertinent. First, appellant argues that there is no
basis for modifying the teachings of Campbell with the
teachings of Gerber, and such modification does not result in
the claimed invention anyway [brief, pages 7-11]. Second,
appellant argues that Campbell and Gerber are each directed to
a technique for determining where to cut a piece of sheet
material whereas the claimed invention is directed to a method
and apparatus for handling material pieces which have already
been cut from the sheet material [id., pages 11-22]. We agree
with each of these arguments.
We will not explain our position in detail in this
decision because we essentially agree with appellant’s
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007