Appeal No. 1997-0068
Application 07/923,278
550, the layer is transported into operative
engagement with a machining unit 590, typically
comprising a conventional multi-blade fly cutter 592
driven by a motor 594 and associated with a dust
collection hood 596 and vacuum cleaner 598.
Machining unit 590 is operative to trim the top
surface of layer 550 to a precise, flat uniform
thickness by removing, as appropriate, excessive
thicknesses of both the solidified solidifiable
material and the solidified support material.
It will be appreciated that the operation of
the system for a single layer as described above is
repeated multiple times, as the support surface 534
is lowered correspondingly, producing a multilayer
built up model having precisely controlled
dimensions [column 17, line 50, through column 19,
line 7].
Claims 24, 30, 34 and 43, the four independent claims on
appeal, stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being
anticipated by Pomerantz. Anticipation, of course, is
established only when a single prior art reference discloses,
expressly or under principles of inherency, each and every
element of a claimed invention. RCA Corp. v. Applied Digital
Data Sys., Inc., 730 F.2d 1440, 1444, 221 USPQ 385, 388 (Fed.
Cir. 1984).
The appellants contend that the invention recited in
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007