Appeal No. 2004-0104
Application No. 09/052,472
The examiner has factually determined that Stokes and Firma
teach similar printing units and, therefore, for simplicity, only
Firma is discussed in the Examiner's Answer. While Firma teaches
a printing unit that comprises a number of the claimed features,
the examiner acknowledges that:
Firma does not teach first and second imaging devices,
means for activating and deactivating the first and
second imaging devices and plate cylinders by
activating the first imaging device while the second
plate cylinder is in a printing position and activating
the second imaging device while the first plate
cylinder is in a printing position, and separate
electric motors for the first and second impression
cylinders.
(Page 3 of Answer, last sentence). Pensavecchia discloses a
printing unit comprising a plurality of imaging devices and
appellants do not dispute the examiner's conclusion that it would
have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to
incorporate the imaging devices of Pensavecchia into the printing
unit of Firma. However, while Pensavecchia discloses means for
activating and deactivating the imaging devices and their plate
cylinders, the examiner recognizes that "Pensavecchia does not
explicitly teach activating the first imaging device while the
second plate cylinder is in a printing position and activating
the second imaging device while the first plate cylinder is in a
printing position" (page 4 of Answer, first paragraph, last
-5-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007