Appeal No. 95-0900
Application 07/947,117
2). Appellants’ method permits an essential shortening of the
labeling work cycle since it involves only horizontal movements
and the vertical transfer movement of the prior art is eliminated
(specification, page 4). Claim 6 is illustrative of the subject
matter on appeal and is attached as an APPENDIX to this decision.
The examiner has relied upon the following references as
evidence of obviousness:
Kistner 3,708,375 Jan. 2, 1973
Heitmann 3,955,481 May 11, 1976
Uchimura et al. (Uchimura) 4,618,392 Oct. 21, 1986
Matuda et al. (Matuda) 4,725,327 Feb. 16, 1988
Trouteaud et al. (Trouteaud) 4,895,614 Jan. 23, 1990
Hannen 5,024,718 Jun. 18, 1991
Claims 6, 7, 10 and 12 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103
as unpatentable over Hannen in view of Matuda and Kistner. Claim
9 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over the
same references as applied against claims 6, 7, 10 and 12 further
in view of Trouteaud or Uchimura. Claims 8 and 11 stand rejected
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over the same references as
applied against claims 6, 7, 10 and 12 further in view of
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007