Appeal No. 1998-3391
Application 08/659,143
on page 8 of the brief, that even if the Examiner could show a
C or U-shaped paper path, one of ordinary skill in the art in
light of the teachings of Sugisaki, Hasegawa and Matsuo would
not arrive at the present invention as set forth in the
claims. In particular, Appellant argues that one of ordinary
skill in the art combining the teachings of Matsuo with the
teachings of Sugisaki and Hasegawa would design a dual printer
printing assembly with an S-shaped paper path between the two
printers.
In response, the Examiner argues on page 4 of the answer
that Figure 1 of Hasegawa depicts the movement of papers from
a paper path (25a) to a claw (26a) which then guides the
papers to receive rollers (29a) which results in a path that
is substantially C-shaped. The Examiner further argues that
the shape of the paper guide does not affect the utility of
the device. The Examiner further argues that Figure 4 of
Matsuo clearly depicts a paper path of a C-shaped nature.
The Federal Circuit states that "[t]he mere fact that the
prior art may be modified in the manner suggested by the
Examiner does not make the modification obvious unless the
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007