Appeal No. 97-2904
Application 08/565,457
by the prior art described in the paragraph bridging pages 2
and 3 of appellant’s specification where it is noted that
sensors are employed to detect an advancing sheet in an
electrophotographic printing machine. Thus, even if it is
assumed arguendo that Dragstedt lacks a disclosure of
appellant’s claimed sensing means, the teachings of Horikawa
taken alone or together with the prior art described on pages
2 and 3 of appellant’s specification would have made it
obvious to employ a sensing means for sensing an advancing
sheet as a convenient and economical way of supplying the
necessary inputs to the controller for switching the transport
between its two modes of operation.
In summary, (1) the examiner’s decision rejecting claim
1 under § 102(b) is reversed, (2) the examiner’s decision
rejecting claims 2, 4 through 9 and 11 through 14 under § 103
is affirmed with respect to claims 2 and 4 through 7, but is
reversed with respect to claims 8, 9 and 11 through 14, and
(3) a new ground of rejection has been introduced against
claim 1 pursuant to the provisions of 37 CFR § 1.196(b).
14
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007