Appeal No. 2001-2332
Application 08/909,249
350 which receives the articles at the fourth location is
correspondingly characterized by a matching array of
receiving ports which is aligned to the altered distribution
of the articles.
Independent claim 29 is representative of the subject matter
on appeal and a copy of that claim may be found in the Appendix
to appellants’ brief.
The prior art references relied upon by the examiner in
rejecting the appealed claims are:
Warren 3,542,224 Nov. 24, 1970
Goransson 3,973,795 Aug. 10, 1976
Riley 4,411,574 Oct. 25, 1983
Montferme et al. (Montferme) 4,444,423 Apr. 24, 1984
Lebret 4,444,424 Apr. 24, 1984
Herman 4,576,560 Mar. 18, 1986
Hansen, Jr. et a l. (Hansen) 4,773,523 Sep. 27, 1988
Colamussi 5,575,376 Nov. 19, 1996
Claims 29, 30 and 44 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
as being unpatentable over Herman in view of Hansen and anyone of
Goransson, Colamussi and Warren.
Claims 29, 30 and 44 additionally stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Herman in view of
Hansen and Colamussi as applied in the preceding paragraph, and
taken further in view of anyone of Riley, Montferme and Lebret.
Rather than attempt to reiterate the examiner's full
commentary with regard to the above-noted rejections and the
conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and appellants
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007