Appeal No. 2003-0119
Application No. 09/569,477
embodiment itself would be anticipatory of the method of
appellant’s claim 11. If the impression cylinders of the second
embodiment of Volz (column 6, lines 33 through 37) are
comprehended to be geared together with the transfer cylinders,
as disclosed and as argued by appellants, then it appears to us
that the transfer cylinders would not be capable of being
mechanically decoupled. Like the examiner (answer, pages 4), we
recognize that the ABSTRACT for the Volz reference addresses what
appears to be highly relevant teachings vis-a-vis the present
invention. However, it is not certain that the ABSTRACT
addresses, in particular, the second embodiment of Volz. For the
above reasons, the present rejection cannot be sustained.
REMAND TO THE EXAMINER
We remand for the examiner’s review of the following
matters.
1. From the disclosure it appears to this panel of the Board that
an apparent attribute of appellants’ printing machine for
achieving the claimed first phase synchronism and second phase
synchronism (claim 11) is a transfer unit (page 6, line 30 to
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007