Ex Parte Junghans

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

Sep 24, 2003

09598580 (B.P.A.I. Sep. 24, 2003)

1
The opinion in support of the decision being entered today
was not written for publication and is not binding precedent
of the Board.
Paper No. 18
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
__________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
__________
Ex parte RUDI JUNGHANS
__________
Appeal No. 2003-1147
Application 09/598,580
__________
ON BRIEF
__________
Before PAK, JEFFREY T. SMITH, and POTEATE, Administrative Patent
Judges.
POTEATE, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is an appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the final
rejection of claims 1-3 and 11-14. Claims 4-10 are also pending
in the application but have been withdrawn from consideration as
directed to a non-elected invention. See Appeal Brief, Paper
No. 13, received October 11, 2002, page 2; Examiner’s Answer,
Paper No. 14, mailed December 24, 2002, page 2, paragraph (3).
Appeal No. 2003-1147
Application No. 09/598,580
2
Claims 1 and 11 are representative of the subject matter on
appeal and are produced below:
1. A method of controlling the supply of ink in a printing
machine wherein the ink is differently guided zonally on an ink-
fountain roller transversely to the printing direction, and is
transferred by a vibrator roller to a distributor roller, which
comprises metering the ink zonally for counteracting ink transfer
disturbances caused by a stroke movement of the distributor
roller, so as to minimize the disturbances automatically to at
least an effective extent.
11. A method of controlling the supply of ink in a printing
machine, which comprises:
metering zonally differentiated ink on an ink-fountain roller
transversely to a printing direction;
transferring the ink by a vibrator roller to a distributor
roller; and
performing the step of zonally metering the ink to counteract ink
transfer disturbances caused by a stroke movement of the
distributor roller.
The reference relied upon by the examiner is:
Thünker et al. (Thünker) 5,701,817 Dec. 30, 1997
GROUND OF REJECTION
Claims 1-3 and 11-14 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b)
as anticipated by Thünker.
We affirm.
Appeal No. 2003-1147
Application No. 09/598,580
3
DISCUSSION
The invention relates to a method of controlling the supply
of ink in a printing machine. Appeal Brief, page 2. In
particular, the claimed method requires that ink is metered
zonally for counteracting ink transfer disturbances caused by a
stroke movement of a distributor roller to thereby minimize the
disturbances automatically. Id., page 22.
Appellant argues that Thünker cannot anticipate the present
invention because, “[t]he causality or dependency (action,
reaction) is reversed in Thünker et al. as compared to the
invention of the instant application.” Reply Brief, Paper No.
15, received March 4, 2003, page 2. In particular, appellant
argues that in Thünker et al., adjustment of the lateral stroke
of the distributor roller is dependent on the ink zone metering
arrangement. Id. In the present invention, adjustment of ink
metering is dependent on the stroke movement of the distributor
roller in order to counteract ink transfer disturbances. Id.
We are unpersuaded by appellant’s arguments. Rather, we are
in agreement with the examiner that “the broadly recited
‘metering ink zonally for counteracting ink transfer disturbances
caused by a stroke movement of the distributor roller’ in claim 1
Appeal No. 2003-1147
Application No. 09/598,580
4
and ‘performing the step of zonally metering the ink to
counteract ink transfer distributor [sic, disturbances] caused by
a stroke movement of a distributor roller’ in claim 11 are met by
the teachings of Thünker et al” (Examiner’s Answer, page 4). See
Panduit Corp. v. Dennison Mfg Co., 810 F.2d 1561, 1567-68,
1 USPQ2d 1593, 1597 (Fed. Cir.), cert. denied, 41 U.S. 1052
(1987) (In making a patentability determination, analysis must
begin with a question, “What is the invention claimed?” since
“[c]laim interpretation . . . will normally control the remainder
of the decisional process.”)
Thünker teaches a method wherein a first ink profile is set
at the adjustable ink zone metering arrangement and, thereafter,
the first ink zone profile is produced by initiating operation of
the printing apparatus, including the distributor roller. See
Thünker, column 4, lines 32-36. After the first print job is
printed, a second print job is effected by adjusting the
adjustable ink zone metering arrangement and varying the
determinable lateral stroke of the distributor roller in relation
to adjustment of the ink zone metering arrangement. Id. at
lines 45-50. Thus, contrary to appellant’s contention, the
lateral stroke of the distributor roller in Thünker is not
adjusted “in dependence” on the ink zone metering arrangement,
Appeal No. 2003-1147
Application No. 09/598,580
5
rather, it is adjusted “in relation to” adjustment of the
adjustable ink zone metering arrangement.
The claims, as drafted, do not limit the claimed method to
one in which the ink is adjusted “in dependence” on the stroke
movement of the distributor roller. Rather, the claims merely
require that the claimed zonal metering be capable of
counteracting ink transfer disturbances caused by the stroke
movement of the distributor roller. We are in agreement with the
examiner that these broad recitations are anticipated by
Thünker’s disclosure of varying lateral stroke of the distributor
roller “in relation to” adjustment of ink zone metering
arrangement when changing from a first to a second print job.
See Examiner’s Answer, page 4.
Accordingly, the rejection is affirmed.
Appeal No. 2003-1147
Application No. 09/598,580
6
TIME PERIOD FOR RESPONSE
No time period for taking any subsequent action in
connection with this appeal may be extended under 37 CFR
§ 1.136(a).
AFFIRMED
CHUNG K. PAK )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
JEFFREY T. SMITH ) APPEALS AND
Administrative Patent Judge ) INTERFERENCES
)
)
)
LINDA R. POTEATE )
Administrative Patent Judge )
LRP:svt
Appeal No. 2003-1147
Application No. 09/598,580
7
LERNER AND GREENBERG P.A.
Post Office Box 2480
Hollywood, FL 33022-2480