Appeal 2007-1799
Application 10/036,991
claim 4 requires that the sanitizer module is adjacent to the filtered transition
area.
The Examiner relies on Call as discussed above (Answer 4). As we
understand the basis of the rejection, the Examiner finds that Call does not
teach the structure of the sanitizer module set forth in Appellants’ claim 4.
The Examiner relies on Stirling to make up for this deficiency. According to
the Examiner, Stirling teaches a configuration for sterilizing articles on a
conveyor, wherein a pair of channels is separated by a cavity (Answer 4).
As discussed above, Call teaches a system for sanitizing mailpieces
which comprises, inter alia, a sanitizer module. Call does not, however,
teach the structure of the sanitizer module. Stirling teaches “a compact
irradiation apparatus integral to a production line that can sterilize product
received from a manufacturing process on a continuous basis” (Stirling, col.
2, ll. 54-58). Stirling’s irradiation apparatus comprises a primary shield that
includes a channel, accommodating a conveyor means, which extends
through the shield and intersects with a central cavity (Stirling, col. 3, ll. 44-
47). Stirling teaches the placement of an irradiation device within the cavity
(Stirling, col. 4, ll. 53-60). Stated differently, Stirling teaches a first set of
guide walls positioned parallel to the feed path and facing each other to form
an alley along the feed path leading into a central cavity. Stirling teaches a
second set of guide walls positioned parallel to the feed path and facing each
other to form an alley along the feed path. Stirling’s second set of guide
walls are down stream of the first set of guide walls and lead away from the
central cavity. Accordingly, the first and second sets of guide walls form a
gap, or central cavity, along the feed path into which a sanitization, e.g.,
irradiation, apparatus is positioned.
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013