Appeal No. 97-2626
Application 08/234,502
device to further inhibit insertion of an incorrectly sized
cassette. (id. at 8).
Narita ‘93 in view of Narita ‘92
12. Narita ‘92 generally teaches a device for
preventing the accidental opening of a cassette cover.
13. The examiner alleges that Narita ‘92 shows in
figures 1-5 a means for blocking (10) an object having a
height less than a correct height, a means for urging (8) the
object towards the top side, means for detecting (11) a
correct height, and a means for disabling (discontinue
blocking) 10 if a correct height is detected. (id. at 6).
The examiner’s rationale
14. According to the examiner, the subject matter of
claims 49, 51, 57, 59, 61, and 62 would have been obvious
within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Narita ‘93 in view
of Narita ‘92 (id. at 14). The examiner reasons that it would
have been obvious to combine Narita ‘93 and ‘92, since doing
so “would further inhibit the insertion of undersized foreign
objects.” (id. at 14).
B. Discussion
1. The rejection based on 35 U.S.C. § 112
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007