Ex parte GOTTLING - Page 3




               Appeal No. 98-1014                                                                                                     
               Application 08/521,013                                                                                                 




                       it is known to use hydrophilic aluminum plate as printing forms for form cylinders in a printing               
                       press and such printing forms can be regenerated by erasing the ink residue remaining on the                   
                       printing form after printing via various known methods so as to render the aluminum printing                   
                       forms hydrophilic again.  However, the detailed method and apparatus for erasing the ink                       
                       residue from the hydrophilic aluminum printing plate are not given.                                            

                       The examiner considers that Roberts teaches a method and apparatus for erasing ink residue                     

               from the surface of a printing cylinder that includes the use of fixed nozzles 58 for impinging pressurized            

               fresh water against the surface of the printing cylinder, and that Chew teaches a cleaning system that                 

               uses high pressure water jets to clean disk surfaces where the water pressure is 2500 to 4000 psi and                  

               the impinging angle of the jets relative to the surface of the disks is 20E to 40E.  Based on these finding            

               the examiner concludes (answer, page 4) that it would have been obvious                                                

                       to provide the appellant’s admitted prior art with the ink residue cleaning structure of                       
                       Roberts with the nozzles arranged at an angle less than 90E with respect to the printing                       
                       cylinder surface as taught by Chew et al. to achieve improved cleaning result.  The                            
                       mere application of a known way of washing the ink residue off the ink bearing surface                         
                       of printing cylinder by those having ordinary skill in the art would involve no apparent                       
                       unobviousness.                                                                                                 

                       With respect to the “pressurized solvent-free water” limitation of claims 1 and 9, the examiner                

               posits (answer, page 4) that “this limitation would be automatically met by the teachings of Roberts and               

               Chew et al. . . .”  Concerning the recited pressure requirements for the water jet called for in the claims,           

               the examiner further posits (answer, pages 4-5) that “[e]ven though the applied references may not                     

               specify the same pressure setting for the pressurized water jet used in their cleaning operation, the                  

                                                                  3                                                                   





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007