Appeal No. 96-0528
Application No. 08/151,463
describing the locking mechanism with respect to the pull-out
operation “implies a mechanical interaction between two
components such that the movement of one component imparts
movement to a second component.” We find this to be a
reasonable definition. The examiner, on the other hand, cites
a dictionary definition of “to assemble or operate
simultaneously as a group” [Answer - page 7] and states merely
that this “definition is applicable to the appealed claims.”
In view of appellant’s disclosed operation, it would
appear that a “ganged relation” between the locking mechanism
and the disc pull-out operation would require a mechanical
interaction between the components so that movement of one
would impart movement to the other. However, even using the
examiner’s broader definition, we do not find that the tray
hook 112 of Miyoshi needs to “operate simultaneously as a
group” with motor 125 and screws 121 in the sense that there
is any direct mechanical interaction between the tray hook and
movement of the elevator chassis. In fact, Miyoshi provides
for a lift drive motor 125 for moving the elevator chassis in
a vertical manner while a separate tray hook drive motor 115
is provided for causing movement of the tray hook.
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007