Appeal No. 95-4167
Application 07/934,316
The examiner concedes that the admitted prior art fails
to disclose a tape feed suspension detection circuit, but says
that Narita discloses a tape feed suspension detection circuit
that can stop the playback after detecting an abnormal condition.
The examiner states that it would have been obvious to provide
the admitted prior art with a tape feed suspension detection
circuit as taught by Narita to protect the tape drive from an
abnormal condition and save power. Examiner’s Answer at 5.
Appellant argues that Narita only teaches stopping the
playback entirely, not setting the playback mode. Appeal Brief
at 19-20.
We agree with appellant.
The examiner’s rationale results in incorporating a
tape feed suspension detection circuit into a video tape stop
decision circuit, not into a video tape playback mode decision
circuit as recited. The claimed invention employs a suspension
detection circuit in a circuit for selecting among different
(non-zero) playback speeds. The examiner provides no rationale
for the obviousness of such an arrangement.
Therefore, the rejection of claim 8 for obviousness is
not sustained.
-3-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007