Appeal No. 95-2898
Application 08/053,193
As pointed out above, Kikuchi fails to teach claws
which engage an upper surface of the optical disk. Kikuchi
teaches protrusions 56 for engaging the optical disk into proper
position. Appellants argue on page 1 of the reply brief that the
Kikuchi protrusions 56 do not engage the upper surface of the
optical disk, but instead engage the cylindrical opening in the
center of the disk. We agree. However, the Examiner did not
rely upon Kikuchi solely but relies on the combination of Kikuchi
and Azuma.
In figures (a) and (c), Azuma teaches claws 10 which
engage an upper surface of the optical disk. The Examiner argues
that it would have been obvious to those skilled in the art to
modify the Kikuchi center core 50 shown in Figure 5 by providing
the Azuma claw 10 and spring 13 in the Kikuchi center core 50 at
a position above the Kikuchi protrusion 56 as recited in
Appellants' claim 1.
The Appellants argue on page 2 of the reply brief that
it is only obvious in view of Appellants' teachings that Kikuchi
could be combined with Azuma. Thus, the Appellants have raised
the question whether it is proper to combine Kikuchi and Azuma.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007