Appeal No. 2003-0587
Application No. 09/533,514
Regarding the examiner’s rejections of claim 37 under 35
U.S.C. § 102(b) based on Raudat or Wayne, we note that claim 37
is directed to a lift table assembly “for supporting a case while
said case is being filled with containers” and sets forth that
the lift table assembly comprises a lift table configured to
support said case, and a lift table drive assembly operably
connected to the lift table, “wherein said lift table drive
assembly lowers said lift table as said case is being filled with
said containers to reduce a shock load associated with said
containers impacting said case.”
Like appellants (brief, page 8), we find nothing in Wayne
that teaches or suggests a lift table assembly “for supporting a
case while said case is being filled with containers,” and a lift
table drive assembly which lowers the lift table “as said case is
being filled with said containers.” Wayne addresses a mechanism
that functions as a stacking machine for cases, cartons, boxes or
crates (A) to be stacked in a layered relationship on a pallet
(6) or removed from the pallet in layers. As indicated in column
4, lines 28-46, of the Wayne patent, the vertical conveyor
10
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007