Appeal No. 2000-1052
Application No. 09/060,012
action. This is a very important principle because it
allows for the use of an efficient crank action to
reciprocate the needles and still gives a flow of
pickle that corresponds to the velocity of the needles
at all times.
We now turn to the examiner's rejection. The examiner
states that Townsend "teaches the use of a machine for injecting
fluids into meat products, wherein the meat (38) is placed on a
conveyor belt (12) and transported to a [sic] injection station
(20) where the meat is injected with a fluid by using moving a
battery of fluid injection needles (36) connected to a source of
fluid into and out of the meat product..." (Answer, page 4.)
According to the examiner (id.), Townsend does not disclose
"continuous longitudinal movement of the meat product while
being injected with fluid."
The examiner next relies on Rejsa for "the concept of
continuous longitudinal movement of a meat product while being
injected with fluid in a meat injecting apparatus." (Id.)
Based on these factual findings, the examiner concludes (id. at
page 5):
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of
ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention
was made to have provided Townsend with the continuous
longitudinal movement of the meat product while being
injected as taught by Rejsa et al. in order to rapidly
and efficiently inject a high throughput of meat
product an hour with liquid flavoring or tenderizing
materials or both, simultaneously injecting different
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007