Appeal No. 1998-1868
Application 08/514,377
at least one cutting device having two superposed knives
having oppositely disposed cutting edges, the printed products
being passed by said conveyor means between said two knives;
and
drive means for moving each of the knives in cutting
engagement with the other knife in a direction that includes a
component perpendicular to the plane of the printed products
and a movement component that is in the feed direction to
maintain a continuous feed flow during the trimming.
The references relied upon by the examiner as evidence of
obviousness are:
Long et al. (Long) 4,142,430 Mar. 6, 1979
Evans 4,387,614 Jun. 14, 1983
Claims 1, 6, 30 and 31 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. §
112, second paragraph, as failing to particularly point out
and distinctly claim the subject matter the appellant regards
as the invention.
Claims 1, 6 and 30 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. §
102(b) as being anticipated by Evans.
Claims 1, 6, 30 and 31 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as being unpatentable over Long in view of Evans.
Reference is made to the appellant’s main and reply
briefs (Paper Nos. 15 and 18) and to the examiner’s answer
(Paper No. 16) for the respective positions of the appellant
-3-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007