Appeal No. 2003-0488
Application No. 09/086,286
ready packing material to be processed, and feeding devices feed the packing
material to each star wheel.
A further understanding of the invention can be derived from a reading of exemplary claim
1, which appears in the Appendix to appellants’ brief.
The references relied upon by the examiner in the final rejection are:
Stahlecker et al. (Stahlecker) 5,135,462 Aug. 4, 1992
Konzal et al. (Konzal) 4,490,130 Dec. 25, 1984
Bader et al. (Bader) 4,842,681 Jun. 27, 1989
Claims 1, 2, 6, 8, 9 and 11-17 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable
over Konzal in view of Stahlecker.
Claims 3-5 and 7 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Konzal
in view of Stahlecker and further in view of Bader.
Reference is made to appellants’ brief (Paper No. 29) and to the examiner’s answer (Paper
No. 30) for the respective positions of appellants and the examiner regarding the merits of these
rejections.
Discussion
Independent claim 1 is directed to an arrangement for manufacturing a paper container from
blanks of material, comprising first and second transport wheels each mounted on a horizontally
extending axis. Processing stations associated with the first transport wheel are configured to form
a sleeve from a blank and assemble a lid to an end area of the sleeve. Processing stations of the
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007