Appeal No. 96-0638
Application 08/074,546
The subject matter of independent claims 7 and 14 on appeal are also not met
under 35 U.S.C. § 102 by the teachings of Tobimatsu, these claims being directed to the
embodiment of Figure 14 of appellants’ disclosed invention. Claim 7 requires that the
second cover rotate independently of the first cover in part. This feature is not met by the
manner in which the examiner applies the reference against the claim. The examiner’s
view is that the second cover 4, or actually the lid 4 in Tobimatsu, rotates independently of
the first cover or tape in holder 12. Since the tape holder 12 in Tobimatsu may not fairly be
stated to operate independently of the operation of the lid 4, since the tape holder 12
operates in dependence of the operation of the lid 4, the examiner’s view that the second
cover or lid 4 rotates independently of the first cover or tape holder 12 is misplaced.
Moreover, claim 7 requires that the second cover independently rotate when the first
cover is opened by a predetermined amount with respect thereto. The examiner’s view
that the second cover or lid 4 operates in a such a manner with respect to the tape holder
12 is misplaced. The opposite is true according to the operation of Tobimatsu, since the
cassette holder 12 operates dependently upon the lid 4 opening in a predetermined
amount such that any rotating action of the holder 12 occurs once the lid 4 is moved. Any
pivoting or rotating action of the lid 4 does not occur by the tape holder 12 being moved
but only vice versa.
Turning to the subject matter of independent claim 14 on appeal, for purposes of
rendering a decision with respect to an art rejection, we construe the claimed cover sliding
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007