Appeal No. 2001-2636
Application No. 09/160,127
The invention disclosed in appellants’ application
relates to “a controller suitable for use in monitoring and
providing diagnostics for one or more [packaging material]
conversion machines . . .” (specification, page 3, lines
12-13).
A copy of the appealed claims is appended to
appellants’ brief.
The following references are relied upon by the
examiner as evidence of obviousness in support of his
rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103:
Neri 4,607,252 Aug. 19, 1986
Moldovansky et al. 5,504,779 Apr. 02, 1996
(Moldovansky)
Ratzel 5,571,067 Nov. 05, 1996
Claims 47-72 and 74-91 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 as being unpatentable over Ratzel in view of Neri,
and claim 73 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Ratzel in view of Neri and Moldovansky.
With regard to the rejection of claims 47-72 and 74-91, the
examiner concludes that the teachings of Neri would have
(. . . continued)
advisory office action of September 8, 2000, the amendment
of August 24, 2000 is identical to the amendment filed June
16, 2000 (Paper No. 14). The claims on appeal are
therefore the same as the claims finally rejected in the
final office action of August 4, 2000.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007