Ex Parte Gardner et al - Page 2

                Appeal 2006-2462                                                                             
                Application 09/790,856                                                                       

                      Independent claim 1 is reproduced below:                                               
                      1.  An apparatus for retrieving data cartridge information associated                  
                with a data cartridge contained in a cartridge receiving device, comprising:                 
                      an identification device comprising a radio frequency identification                   
                (RFID) transponder mounted to the data cartridge, said RFID transponder                      
                containing the data cartridge information; and                                               
                      a reader mounted to a least one storage slot of the cartridge receiving                
                device, said reader operable to read said RFID transponder within the                        
                cartridge receiving device when the data cartridge is positioned in the at                   
                least one storage slot of the cartridge receiving device.                                    
                      The following references are relied on by the Examiner:                                
                      Tanaka  US 6,045,041        Apr.  4, 2000                                              
                      Brady   US 6,201,474 B1        Mar. 13, 2001                                           
                                                                            (Filed November 18, 1998)        
                      All claims noted earlier on appeal stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.                      
                § 103.  As evidence of obviousness, the Examiner relies upon Tanaka in                       
                view Brady.                                                                                  
                      Rather than repeat the positions of the Appellant and the Examiner,                    
                reference is made to the Brief and Reply Brief for Appellant’s positions, and                
                to the Answer for the Examiner’s positions.                                                  
                                                 OPINION                                                     
                      For the reasons stated by the Examiner in the Answer, as amplified                     
                here, we sustain the rejection of all claims on appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 103.                
                      For purposes of our analysis, Appellant has considered independent                     
                claims 1 and 9 together; the same may be said of independent claims 18 and                   
                52.  Separate arguments are presented as to dependent claims 33 and 57 on                    
                appeal.                                                                                      

                                                     2                                                       

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next

Last modified: September 9, 2013