Appeal No. 1997-2986
Application No. 08/260,784
The rejection of claims 15 and 22 is affirmed for the
reasons given in the discussion of similar claim 5.
The rejection of claim 16 is reversed for the reasons
given in the discussion of similar claim 6.
Claim 23, unlike the other claims, calls for storing
finished pieces having the same dimension produced in
accordance with different program routines (e.g., from
different sheets of stock) in the same unloading location
(i.e., pallet location). Specifically, the claim recites:
extracting relevant data from a program added to
said production run before the end of said production
run;
analyzing from the extracted data the dimensions of
pieces to be cut from worksheets in accordance with said
added program; [and]
routing each piece cut from said added program
having the same dimension as one of said dimensioned
groups of cut pieces to the same location on said surface
area of said unloading means where said one dimensioned
group of cut pieces are routed.
We note that the claim language does not require that the
program be added after the start of the production run, and
thus can refer to the identification of the last set of
patterns in a job lot. Taijonlahti does not explain where
identical pieces are stored on pallet 7 when they appear in
- 17 -
Page: Previous 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007