Appeal No. 1996-2027
Application 07/965,079
transmitting data representing said free-form surface to a tool path forming unit;
generating at said tool path forming unit processing data on the basis of said data representing
said free-form surface; and
molding an object on the basis of said processing data, said object being a physical
embodiment of said free-form surface.
The following references are relied on by the examiner:
Riley et al. (Riley) 5,121,334 Jun. 9, 1992
Foley et al. (Foley), Computer Graphics, Principles and Practice, pages 216-53, 471-529,
740-45, and 1094-1103 (1990).
The 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, rejection of claims 5 to 9 (see final rejection, page 2,
paragraph 4) has apparently been withdrawn.3
Claims 5 to 9 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103. As evidence of obviousness, the
examiner relies upon Foley and Riley.
Rather than repeat the positions of appellants and the examiner, reference is made to the Brief
and the Answer for the respective details thereof.
OPINION
At the outset, we note that appellants (Brief, page 8) and the examiner (Answer, page 2) are in
3 The Advisory Action dated April 24, 1995, at paragraphs 3 and 4 therein, indicates that the April 10, 1995,
response to the final rejection amending claims 5 to 9 will be entered and overcomes the § 112, second paragraph,
rejection.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007