Appeal 2006-2343
Application 10/246,620
of von Kraewel is in roll form at the time it is die cut. As shown in Figure
2b, von Kraewel describes die cutting at the location of the rotary transducer
231. The tape 251 has been unrolled from roller 261 by the time it has
reached the die cutting cylinder. As argued by Appellants, there are no holes
in the tape of von Kraewel when the tape is in roll form (Br. 6).
Sakamoto, as applied by the Examiner, does not cure the deficiencies
of the rejection. We conclude that the Examiner has failed establish a prima
facie case of obviousness over von Kraewel and Sakamoto.
The Rejection of Claims 2 and 12 Over von Kraewel, Sakamoto, and UM305
UM305, as applied by the Examiner, does not cure the deficiencies of
von Kraewel. Therefore, we conclude that the Examiner has failed to
establish a prima facie case of obviousness with respect to claims 2 and 12
for the reasons provided above with regard to the rejection of claim 1 over
von Kraewel and Sakamoto.
CONCLUSION
In summary, we sustain the rejections of claims 1 and 2 over Keller
and the rejection of claim 7 over Keller in view of Huss. We do not sustain
the rejection of 1, 3-11, and 13-25 over von Kraewel and Sakamoto or the
rejection of claims 2 and 12 over von Kraewel, Sakaomoto, and UM305.
We, therefore, affirm-in-part.
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007