Appeal No. 96-3945
Application 08/095,016
We sustain also the rejection of all dependent claims on
appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 103 in light of the additional
teachings to Kinoshita. The manual feeding port 41 in Figure
1 of Kinoshita clearly would have indicated to the artisan the
type of claimed chute structure set forth in dependent claims
22 and 35 on appeal for manual insertability to provide a more
direct input arrangement for the sheet material into the
simulated color print structure of Figure 2 of Ambro. Figure
2 of Ambro alone also suggests a manual insertability of a
transparent color imaged substrate.
Other than the general showing in Figure 1, appellants'
own disclosed invention does not explicitly detail the
mechanical interconnectability of the imaging device 18,
detailed in Figure 4 of the disclosure, in the manner in which
it actually mates with the processor 90 in appellants'
disclosed Figure 1. There are clear suggestions to the
artisan within the teachings of Ambro that such a combined
structure was contemplated but not shown. The mechanics of
implementing this would have been clearly obvious to the
artisan with the additional teachings provided by Kinoshita's
transport arrangements in Figure 1. Obviously, to the
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007