Appeal No. 97-1758 Page 9
Application No. 08/326,721
Regarding independent claims 1 and 15, the examiner notes
that Fago teaches a disk cartridge storage and retrieval
system comprising a carriage, a first pulley or moving means,
a motor, and a belt or coupling means as claimed. (Final
Rejection at 4, 8.) He admits, “Fago Jr. does not disclose a
spring coupled between the motor and the cartridge to create a
predetermined tension in the belt, or the position of the
motor being dictated by the spring force and the belt.” (Id.
at 4.) The examiner characterizes Lissner as follows.
Lissner discloses (see Fig. 2a) a magnetic disk
storage apparatus in which rotation is transmitted
between a motor 25 and a pulley 18 by a belt 44, and
tension is created in the belt by a spring 52
mounted between a housing and a motor plate 50 to
which said motor is fixed so as to exert a force
between the housing and the motor opposite to the
force exerted between the motor and said pulley by
the belt. (Id.)
He concludes that it would have been obvious to add a spring
as disclosed by Lissner to the pulley and belt arrangement of
Fago “to insure proper tension of the belt even in case of
lengthening of the belt due to wear.” (Id. at 4-5.) The
examiner applies similar reasoning to reject independent claim
8. (Id. at 7.) In response the appellant notes that while
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007