Appeal No. 97-1398
Application 08/295,225
reel. The reply brief does not explain why it would have been
unobvious in view of Sasaki's audio cassette to incorporate
Fujimura's cleaning tape into a VCR cassette having supply and
takeup reels. In fact, the reply brief does not discuss Sasaki
at all, instead discussing Siddiq, which was not relied in the
new grounds of rejection. Accordingly, the rejection of claim 3
over Fujimura in view of Sasaki is affirmed, as is the rejection
of dependent claims 12, 35, and 40, which were not separately
argued with respect to the examiner's reliance on Fujimura's
check portions 11.
Independent method claim 30 requires the recording of
signals representing audio sounds and images to be played
simultaneously with cleaning. This is implied by the step of
running a length of the tape "through the VCR to clean the heads
and tape guides and simultaneously to play audio sounds and video
images." The examiner has neither contended nor explained why it
would have been obvious to actually record audio and video
information in Fujimura's cleaning portions 10, as is required to
satisfy claim 30. Consequently, the rejection of that claim is
reversed, as is the rejection of dependent claims 31 and 32,
which are not separately argued in the reply brief.
- 17 -
Page: Previous 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007