Appeal No. 96-0356
Application 08/163,635
Rather than reiterate the entire arguments of the appellants
and the examiner in support of their respective positions,
reference is made to the appellants’ brief (Paper No. 12) and to
the examiner’s answer (Paper No. 13) for the full exposition
thereof.
OPINION
In reaching our conclusions on the issues raised in this
appeal, we have carefully considered appellants’ specification
and claims, the applied references, and the respective viewpoints
advanced by the appellants and the examiner. These
considerations lead us to make the determinations which follow.
As a preliminary matter we base our understanding of the
appealed subject matter upon the following interpretation of the
terminology employed in the claims. In claim 1, we understand
the “first roller” as readable on the disclosed roller 96 and the
“second roller” as readable on the disclosed roller 114. In
keeping with this interpretation, we observe that roller 96
rotates in a first direction 126 and roller 114 rotates in the
first direction 162 (See Figure 2) and a second direction 166
(See Figure 4). We interpret the rotating means to include
roller 96 and gears 122, 124, 128, 129, 130, 136, 140 and 158.
As such, when gear 158 engages gear 138 the second roller 114
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007