Appeal No. 2006-1463 Page 5
Application No. 10/703,932
prevent the sheets from binding, bending tearing or failing to enter the stack as a
result of gravity feeding and, in fact, would have dissuaded one of ordinary skill in
the art from modifying a top-feed system to a bottom-feed system because of the
binding, bending, tearing, etc. issues presented by a bottom-feed system. It follows
that we cannot sustain the examiner’s rejection of appellants’ method claims 1-8 as
being unpatentable over Tsai in view of Irvine.
Each of appellants’ claims 15-25 recites a stationary stacker base, a shiftable
stacker carriage on the stacker base and a feeder on the stacker carriage for
feeding sheets. The arrangement of a feeder on the shiftable stacker carriage is not
taught or suggested by Tsai or Irvine. The rejection of claims 15-25 as being
unpatentable over Tsai in view of Irvine thus also cannot be sustained.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007