Appeal No. 2000-2024
Application No. 09/059,207
We do not consider this rejection to be well taken. In
the Hardigg apparatus, as noted previously, pivoting is
provided so that the heating assembly 18 can move
horizontally, but in the Konaka apparatus camming means 142
causes the receiver 85 to move only along a vertical axis, not
horizontally. We therefore agree with appellants that4
Hardigg would not provide any teaching or suggestion to pivot
receiver 85 of Konaka instead of using camming means, since
Hardigg's pivoting means is used to provide horizontal
movement, and Konaka's camming means is used to provide
vertical movement.
Accordingly, the rejection of claims 15 and 16 will not
be sustained. However, we will sustain the rejection of
claims 17 and 18, since appellants' only argument as to
rejection (3) is that Hardigg would not suggest substitution
of a pivoting action, and a pivoting action is not recited in
claims 17 and 18.
Rejection (4)
This rejection will not be sustained for the reasons
4Except insofar as it rotates about the axis of wheel 22,
which is not relevant here.
11
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007