Appeal No. 96-2686
Application 08/224,213
Herleth et al.(Herleth) 3,949,421 Apr. 6, 1976
Oguchi et al.(Oguchi) 4,945,437 Jul. 31, 1990
Claims 1 through 5 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
As evidence of obviousness, the examiner offers Herleth and
Oguchi [answer, page 2].
Reference is made to Appellant's brief, reply brief, and
the examiner's answer for their respective positions.
OPINION
We have carefully considered the entire record before us,
and we will reverse the obviousness rejection of claims 1
through 5.
With respect to independent claim 1, the Examiner takes
the position that Oguchi discloses the claimed arrangement
except that Oguchi does not show a translational movement of
the magnetic head 10. The Examiner uses Herleth to show the
translational movement of a magnetic head, item 5 in figure 2.
The Examiner asserts that it would have been obvious, to one
of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention, to
arrange the [magnetic] head of Oguchi to be moveable along the
pivot axis, as it was well known to do so, for the purposes of
-3-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007