Appeal No. 97-2480
Application 08/296,122
would have informed those versed in the art of the need for a
weighing scale to accomplish the weighing function, the scale
being positioned to weigh an encased product exiting an
encasing machine. Thus, contrary to appellant’s concern that
Meier lacks the “how and where” a scale would be used (brief,
page 4), we are of the view that the Meier teaching would have
been highly instructive to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Appellants also consider the volume determination method of
Meier as not reliable and as less likely to be understood by a
machine operator (brief, page 4). Notwithstanding this latter
subjective assessment of a volume method, Meier nevertheless
explicitly teaches weighing, as an alternative, to those
having ordinary skill in the art. For the
preceding reasons, and again contrary to the view advocated by
appellants (brief, page 4), we have concluded that the claimed
method would have been obvious.
NEW GROUND OF REJECTION
Under the authority of 37 CFR 1.196(b), this panel of the
board enters the following new ground of rejection.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007