Appeal No. 2005-0970 Page 7
Application No. 09/918,760
as discussed above, discloses each element recited in the body of
the claim.
We therefore find that the apparatus claimed in the
appellants’ claim 9 is anticipated by Narita. Accordingly, we
affirm the rejection over Narita of that claim and claims 10-15
that stand or fall therewith.
Rejection over Nureki
Nureki discloses a line printer having a motor that rotates
a platen roller (col. 2, lines 4-6). The line printer includes a
motor control that reverses the motor by a predetermined amount
before the motor is turned off to stop printing, and forwardly
rotates the motor by the same amount before starting printing
(col. 2, lines 10-14 and 62-63). Thus, the motor rotates in
increments and necessarily is connected to a drive train that
drives the platen roller.
The appellants argue that Nureki does not disclose stopping
the substrate short of a desired position and finally advancing
the substrate (brief, pages 8-9; reply brief, pages 4-5). That
argument is not well taken because at each of Nureki’s increments
the substrate is stopped short of the end-of-printing position,
and ultimately the substrate is advanced to the desired end-of-
printing position.
The appellants argue that Nureki does not disclose a
backlash reduction apparatus (reply brief, page 4). That
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007