Appeal No. 97-1890
Application 08/338,707
the art.
Upon a closer review of Kapp, we fail to find that Kapp
teaches that the time of the envelope transport is related to
the collation transport only by way of determined events
occurring in the transport of each collation and envelope.
Kapp teaches a paper feeder apparatus having only one tray
which is capable of accommodating papers of different sizes as
well as envelopes using different storage trays which are to
be inserted by the operator for each respective use. See
column 2, line 50, through column 3, line 11. Kapp does not
teach an apparatus that provides both kinds of transports in
the same apparatus much less providing the timing as recited
in Appellants' claim 4. There-fore, we will not sustain the
Examiner's rejection of claims 4 and 5.
In view of the foregoing, the decision of the Examiner
rejecting claims 1 through 3 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is
affirmed; however, the decision of the Examiner rejecting
claims 4 and 5 through 23 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is reversed.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in
connection with this appeal may be extended under 37 CFR
§ 1.136(a).
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007