Appeal No. 2000-2024
Application No. 09/059,207
conveyed past the forming, filling and sealing means by
Keeler's conveyor 22, the end of which would correspond to
Konaka's conveyor 11. They would then be conveyed past
Konaka's attaching means by conveying means consisting of
chain 17 and wheels 19, 22 and 89, thence to conveyor 90. As
discussed above with regard to rejection (1), the attaching
means (here, of Konaka) and the conveying means would all be
installed together; in fact, Konaka's conveying means 17, 19,
22, 89 is in one unit with the attaching means. Therefore,
the attaching means would be installed at the conveying means
without altering the conveying means, as recited in claim 10,
since both means would be installed at the same time.
Appellants further argue that "there is no attaching
means over a first conveying means" (brief, page 7), but
neither of claims 14 or 19, nor parent claim 10, recites a
"first" conveying means, nor that the attaching means is
"over" the conveying means.
We therefore will sustain the rejection of claims 14 and
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007