Appeal No. 2003-0653 Page 5
Application No. 09/861,268
Figure 1 of the Admitted Prior Art depicts a feeder 101 having a container 103
for holding a plurality of needles 107; a blade 105 disposed at least partially within a
slot 111 of the container; and a motor 112 coupled to the blade for moving the blade up
and down within the slot to singulate a blunt. The blade has a curved tip end 105A
which as shown in Figure 1 has captured securely one needle. The appellant admits
(specification, p. 3) that a feeder similar to Figure 1 has been used to singulate a blunt
from a set of blunts in order to take the singulated blunt and then insert it into the
cannula of a needle to assemble the needle assembly. The appellant then states that a
D-shaped blunt presents a challenge for the feeder of Figure 1 since the blade 105
may not successfully singulate one blunt from the set of blunts as represented in
Figures 2A and 2B. Figure 2A shows two D-shaped blunts 203, 205 side-by-side on
the curved tip end 105A of the blade 105. Figure 2B shows one D-shaped blunt 209
supported directly on the curved tip end 105A of the blade 105 and another D-shaped
blunt 207 supported directly on top of the D-shaped blunt 209.
With respect to claim 11, the appellant asserts that the Admitted Prior Art does
not have a tip end designed to capture securely only one D-shaped blunt, wherein a
further D-shaped blunt is not securely maintained in said tip end. We do not agree.
The appellant's Figures 6A, 6B and 6C show various examples of how more than one
D-shaped blunt can be picked up by the appellant's blade having a D-shaped cutout.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007