Appeal No. 2002-1058
Application 09/228,856
THE REJECTIONS
Claims 1 through 14, 16 through 21 and 24 through 36 stand
rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over
Scarpa.
Claims 1 through 3 and 7 through 11 stand rejected under 35
U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Scarpa in view of
Dieterlen.
Claims 4 through 6, 12 through 14, 16 through 21 and 24
through 36 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Scarpa in view of Dieterlen and Focke.
Attention is directed to the appellants’ main and reply
briefs (Paper Nos. 14 and 16) and to the examiner’s answer (Paper
No. 15) for the respective positions of the appellants and the
examiner with regard to the merits of these rejections.2
DISCUSSION
I. The rejection based on Scarpa alone
Scarpa discloses a pouch cutting and transfer apparatus (see
Figure 1) comprising an index wheel 13 for receiving a train or
2 In the final rejection (Paper No. 7), claims 1 through 14
also stood rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, as
being indefinite. As this rejection has not been restated or
otherwise mentioned in the examiner’s answer, we assume it has
been withdrawn. See Ex parte Emm, 118 USPQ 180, 181 (Bd. App.
1957).
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007