Appeal No. 1997-4444
Application 08/427,884
axial force to the spindle. The spring does not apply axial
force to the spindle to eliminate vibration and would not have
suggested the claimed subject matter.
Claims 19 and 20
Claim 19 includes the feature of a drive collar mounted
on a threaded shaft, which was addressed in the rejection of
claim 14. Because we reversed the rejection of claim 14 we,
likewise, reverse the rejection of claim 19 and its dependent
claim 20.
Claim 19 also includes the feature of compression springs
applying tension to the shaft so that a resonant frequency is
greater than a frequency at which the drive collar rotates
about the shaft. For the reasons stated in connection with
claims 15-18, we find that Verhagen does not teach or suggest
this structure or function. For this additional reason, the
rejection of claim 19 and its dependent claim 20 is reversed.
Claim 23
Appellant argues that "Satoh et al. in view of Yamakawa
et al. does not teach placing a cassette on a reference platen
- 22 -
Page: Previous 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007