Appeal No. 2001-2664
Application 09/354,814
The system includes at least one transport robot operative to
move along a guide structure between the libraries.
Reference is made to the appealed claims appended to
appellant’s brief for further details with respect to the claimed
subject matter.
The reference of record relied upon by the examiner as
evidence of anticipation is:
Moy et al. (Moy) 4,928,245 May 22, 1990
REJECTION
Claims 1 through 28 and 30 through 33 stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 102 as anticipated by Moy.
According to appellant claims 1 through 28 and 30 through 33
stand or fall together. Accordingly, we will limit our
consideration to independent claim 1 on appeal.
OPINION
We have carefully reviewed the claimed subject matter in
light of the arguments of the appellants and the examiner. As a
result of this review, we have reached the finding that the
claims on appeal lack novelty over the applied prior art.
Accordingly, the rejection of the claims on appeal is affirmed.
Our reasons follow.
-2-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007