Appeal No. 2001-1214 Page 8
Application No. 09/213,726
The anticipation rejection based on Travnicek
We will not sustain the rejection of claims 17 to 19, 22 to 24 and 28 under
35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by Travnicek.
Travnicek discloses a device for the axial reciprocation of ink distributing rollers
of a printing machine. As shown in Figure 1, the amplitude of the axial reciprocation of
ink vibrator rollers 1 may be adjusted while the press is in operation. A control member
11 is pivoted at 25 and is provided with an arcuate slot 12 along which a roller 17
connected to the end of a connecting rod 7 is constrained to slide when driven by a
crank 20. A second connecting rod 6 acts between the roller 17 and a known type of
rocking arrangement 1-5. The slot 12 is such that the control plate may be rotated
so as to place the center of curvature of the slot coincident with rocking axis 26, under
which situation no rocking can occur. As the control member 11 is rotated by gears 14,
16 the rocking amplitude increases.
Claim 17 is not anticipated by Travnicek for the reasons set forth by the
appellants in the brief (pp. 23-24). In the rejection of claim 17, the examiner never
specifically set forth how all the limitations of claim 17 were readable on Travnicek.
While the claimed first and second transmission members may be readable on
Travnicek's connecting rods 7 and 6, respectively, the claimed actuator for adjusting the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007