Appeal No. 1997-3141
Application No. 08/327,347
the first line controller automatically
retrieving, in response to
determining that the first product is of the
second type, the second processing information
from the second line controller in which the
second
processing information is stored; and
the first line controller utilizing the
second processing information for
processing the first product in response to
determining that the first product is of the
second type and subsequent to retrieving the
second processing information.
The Examiner relies on the following prior art:
Imai et al. (Imai) 5,150,288 Sep.
22, 1992
Claims 1-5, 10, 11, and 13-18 stand finally rejected
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Imai.
Rather than reiterate the arguments of Appellants and the
Examiner, reference is made to the Briefs and Answer for the 1
respective details.
OPINION
We have carefully considered the subject matter on
appeal, the rejection advanced by the Examiner, the arguments
1The Appeal Brief was filed June 24, 1996. In response
to the Examiner’s Answer dated June 17, 1997, Appellants filed
a Reply Brief on July 14, 1997 which was acknowledged and
entered by the Examiner on October, 8, 1997.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007