Appeal No. 95-3351
Application No. 07/735,356
The examiner states that Filion discloses the invention
substantially as claimed. Examiner’s Answer at 3. In
connection with exemplary Claim 1, the examiner says that
Filion’s print job data are received in inputs 312A and 312B
and stored in memory. Examiner’s Answer at 4. As applied to
Claims 9, 20, 22, and 23, we agree with the examiner’s
reasoning.
Claims 9, 20, 22, and 23, in contrast to Claims 1, 2, and
5, do not require the input unit to be in a remote location.
Thus, the recited input unit is satisfied by Filion’s local
input unit that includes keypad 230 shown in Figure 3.
Similarly, Claims 9, 20, 22, and 23, in contrast to
Claims 3, 4, 16, 17, 19, 28, 29, 30, and 31, do not recite
storing data to be printed, but include storing job control
data regarding the pages to be printed. Thus, the recited
memory is satisfied by Filion’s memory storing job control
information. Column 4, lines 51-53.
We note Appellants’ argument based on the sixth paragraph
of 35 U.S.C. § 112. However, the input, the input unit, and
the memory are not recited in means plus function format.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007