Appeal No. 97-2547
Application 07/949,042
48 as being anticipated by DeHart.
Claim 48 recites a method comprising, inter alia, the
step of conveying the contents separated from envelopes along
a path which extends between a separating station and a work
station with “the greater portion of the path length being
horizontal.” As is readily apparent from Figure 1 in the
DeHart reference, the path extending between DeHart’s
separating station 34 and work station (the area immediately
downstream of the chute 38) does not have a length the greater
portion of which is horizontal. The examiner’s three theories
to the contrary (see page 4 and 5 in the final rejection,
Paper No. 26, and pages 5 and 6 in the answer, Paper No. 37)
are not persuasive because they are based interpretations of
DeHart which are completely inconsistent with teachings of
this reference.
We shall sustain, however, the standing 35 U.S.C. § 103
rejection of claim 48 as being unpatentable over DeHart in
view of Russell.
-9-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007