Appeal 2006-3022
Application 10/286,434
of detecting and maintaining the temperature of the sealing element within a
temperature range for effective sealing of films over a plurality of sealing
cycles. Appellants have not adequately rebutted the Examiner’s position by
presenting evidence that establishes that the controller described by Jurrius
is not capable of functioning to continuously maintain the temperature of the
sealing element within a temperature range effective for the sealing of films
over a plurality of sealing cycles.
Appellants’ arguments regarding claims 2 and 10 are not persuasive.
As to claim 2, Appellants argue that the invention of Jurrius is not the same
because the temperature sensor (66) is located on the plate (30) that senses
the temperature for regulating the cooling tubes (Br. 8). Jurrius discloses the
use of a variable temperature sensor for detecting the temperature during the
heating sequence in addition to the cooling sequences Jurrius discloses
temperature sensors on plates (14) and (30) functions to hold the materials to
be fused and provides the temperature for both heating and cooling
sequences. (See col. 5, ll. 56-60; col.6, ll. 7-11; and col. 9, ll.13-33).As to
claim 10, Appellants’ arguments are not persuasive because they are directed
to the function of the apparatus and not to the structure of the apparatus.
Moreover, Appellants have not indicated how the temperature controller of
Jurrius is not capable of functioning as specified in the claim.
As for the § 103 rejections of claims 1-11 and 16, Appellants have not
adequately rebutted the reasonable position articulated by the Examiner in
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013