Appeal No. 1997-2986
Application No. 08/260,784
movable relative to supporting legs 8 and maneuvering
assemblies 9 and 10 and engages mechanically the plates to be
carried forward" (col. 3, lines 41-47). The examiner (Answer
at 4) cites the "programmed grouping and stacking" operation
of mechanism 3 as evidence that Taijonlahti also contemplates
handling plated cut in accordance with a plurality of nest
programs, i.e., a plurality of the claimed program routines.
We agree that the patterns A-D in Taijonlahti's Figure 3A can
6
be considered to represent a first program routine and
patterns E -K to represent a second program routine.
1
Alternatively, patterns A-K can be considered to represent a
single program routine and the patterns to be cut from the
next plate blank (not shown, but which also can have the
patterns shown in Figure 3A) to represent a second program
routine.
The examiner argues that "[i]t would have been obvious .
. . to employ the sorter of Taijonlahti with the cutting
system of Levine because it would allow for easy transfer for
further production" (Answer at 4), which we understand to mean
that the examiner is proposing to modify Levine by adding
Taijonlahti's conveyor 2 and unloading and handling mechanism
- 9 -
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007