Appeal No. 98-2691
Application No. 08/529,041
controller (30) for controlling the servomotor" (id., pp. 5
and 6), and concludes (id., page 6):
In view of Coleman and what is known in the art,
it would have been obvious to one having
ordinary skill in the art to provide Croteau
with an actuating servo and a motor encoder
connected to the actuating servo, wherein the
data set of the regulating means has a sequence
of numbers with each number representing a
desired motor angle provided for by the
actuating servo, in order to facilitate movement
of the nozzle along the selected path.
Appellants argue, in essence, that the combination of
Croteau and Coleman does not disclose either the designating
means (identifying step) or the regulating means (or step)
recited in the claims. According to appellants, Croteau only
senses the speed of the substrate (by wheel 7), and neither
Croteau nor Coleman teaches identifying a plurality of
selected article lengths along the substrate, as claimed.
Also Croteau and Coleman do not teach regulating as set forth
in the claims (brief, pages 17 to 20).
The examiner responds to appellants’ first argument that
Croteau’s sensing wheel 7 is the equivalent of appellants’
disclosed encoder since each "identifies when a predetermined
or desired length of the moving web has been advanced and
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007