Appeal No. 1997-3970
Application No. 08/391,379
is designed to convey information about the cassette to the
recording and reproducing apparatus, but Sawada’s cassette
does not use an electrical impedance to convey this
information. Sawada conveys information as to whether a
cassette is an IC type cassette or a terminal type cassette.
Figure 8 shows the IC type cassette whereas Figure 9 shows the
terminal type cassette. Although the IC type cassette of
Figure 8 does reveal that the cassette is an IC type cassette,
it does not achieve this by use of an impedance value. The
disclosed integrated circuit is not an impedance and has no
impedance value to indicate anything. The terminal type
circuit of Figure 9 has no impedance elements at all, and the
examiner’s position that ordinary conductors (no theoretical
resistance) are impedance elements violates both the ordinary
definition of the term and the disclosed meaning of the term.
Since all the elements of these claims are not present in the
disclosure of Sawada, we do not sustain the rejection of these
claims under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) based on Sawada.
We now consider the rejection of claims 3-13, 16-26
and 29-34 under 35 U.S.C. § 103. In rejecting claims under 35
U.S.C. § 103, it is incumbent upon the examiner to establish a
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007