Appeal 2007-1422
Reexamination Control 90/007,260
Patent 6,093,139
cylinder) that are moveable opposite to the collection cylinder’s rotation
under the broadest reasonable definition of “opposite to a sense of rotation”
(Stab, col. 3, ll. 26-30). These grippers “[grip] a leading edge of [the]
leading portion of [the] paper web,” which encompasses the “next product’s
front portion” (Stab, col. 5, ll. 14-15).
Claim 2 reads (Appendix A to the Brief):
Product cutting device of claim 1, wherein said surface of the product
folding cylinder supporting the incoming material is a surface
supporting an incoming web of material, and wherein said product
seizing element is arranged on said product folding cylinder.
Stab discloses a collection cylinder with seizing elements and a
surface that supports the incoming web of material (Stab, col. 5, ll. 11-16).
We interpreted Applicant’s claimed “product folding cylinder” to encompass
either Stab’s collection cylinder or folding cylinder.
Claim 3 reads (Appendix A to the Brief):
Product cutting device according to claim 1, wherein said product
seizing element is arranged as a hold down device on said cutting
cylinder.
The Examiner cites Sheldon’s hold down member 42, located on
cutting cylinder 11, as this seizing element (Answer 6-7). Appellant argues
that “bar 42 is not ‘moveable opposite to a sense of rotation of [the] product
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013