Appeal No. 98-2109
Application No. 08/500,315
that, as to the other claims remaining in the application,
claims 21 to 24 are allowed, and claims 4, 20 and 25 would be
allowable if rewritten in independent form.
The subject matter in issue is exemplified by claim 1,
the only independent claim on appeal, which reads (emphasis
added):
A liquid-jet cutting device comprising:
a cutting element for emitting a
liquid-jet stream to cut a product located
upon a product support surface;
an assembly for moving the cutting
element between a cutting position located
a cutting distance, within a cutting range,
from the product and an idle position
located an idle distance from the product
support surface; and
a deflector disk, located proximate
the idle position of the cutting element,
to deflect the liquid-jet stream when the
cutting element is moved to the idle
position.
The reference applied in the final rejection is:
Driver 5,318,395 Jun. 7,
1994
Claims 1 to 3, 5 and 9 to 11 stand finally rejected as
being anticipated by Driver, under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b).
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007