Appeal No. 2003-0587
Application No. 09/533,514
mechanism therein is used as a palletizer and “to best advantage
in conjunction with high volumetric operations such as is present
in the canning or bottling lines of soft drink plants and
breweries, for example, wherein cases of filled and sealed
bottles or cans are produced in the line at rates of up to 40 or
more per minute.” The examiner’s cryptic reference to column 5,
lines 25-31 of Wayne in the rejection set forth on page 5 of the
answer, does nothing to change our view as noted above. Thus, the
examiner’s rejection of claim 37 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) based
on Wayne will not be sustained.
The patent to Raudat is directed to a case packer like that
set forth in claim 37 on appeal, but this patent addresses the
problem of dropping of the containers, and the associated impact
of the containers on the bottom of the case and the lift table,
in an entirely different way than appellants, and different from
that set forth in claim 37 on appeal. The apparatus in Raudat
includes a means (e.g., Fig. 4) for decelerating the downwardly
moving articles (A) as they descend into the case and also
provides an impact absorbing means (Figs. 2, 2A) mounted in
11
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007