Appeal No. 96-3746
Application 08/236,007
We agree with the examiner that the signal which
initiates the feed cycle when the adjusted long term ink level is
greater than the set point may be considered the first signal as
recited in claim 1 and the signal which terminates the feed cycle
when the adjusted long term ink level is less than the set point
may be considered the second signed. However, in Barney, ink is
supplied to the ink fountain in the form of a feed cycle wherein
for some portion of the cycle the control value is open and for
some portion of the cycle the control value is closed (Col. 4,
line 33, Col. 6, line 61 - Col.7, line 3). The total cycle time
is chosen to allow the ink in the ink fountain to seek a new
level when ink feed has occurred.
We find no disclosure or suggestion in Barney of:
an arithmetic computing device for computing
a relative relationship between a time period
during which said ink amount detection device
produces said first signal and a time period
during which said ink amount detecting device
produces said second signal.
As is recited in Claim 1, Barney never compares the ink signals
but rather compares the ink levels and as such Barney does not
compute a relative relationship between the time periods during
which the first signal and the second signal are produced.
The examiner in discussing the disclosure of Barney
stated:
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007