Appeal No. 2002-1732
Application No. 09/338,238
applied references all seem directed to fully automatic
adjustments.
With regard to claims 27-33, appellants assert that no
reference teaches or suggests the system logic being involved in
assisting the operator in making any adjustment decisions
regarding cross-direction alignment. The examiner counters that
this is the exact purpose of the devices in Gilbert, Toensing,
Raney and Weyenberg, i.e., alignment, positioning or
registration.
Since the claims recite that the logic “assists the operator
in making appropriate adjustment decisions...,” we will not
sustain the examiner’s rejection of these claims because the
examiner has not addressed the issue of operator assistance. As
appellants point out, the references are all concerned with
automatically making adjustments with no teaching of operator
assistance in making the decisions. Since the examiner has not
identified where, in the references, operator input is suggested,
no prima facie case of obviousness has been established.
Moreover, these claims depend from claim 26, the rejection of
which has not been sustained.
-14-
Page: Previous 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007