Appeal No. 1998-0205
Application No. 08/464,150
The examiner relies on the following references:
Park 4,757,400 Jul. 12, 1988
Kim 5,355,265 Oct. 11, 1994
(filed Jun. 19, 1992)
Claims 6 and 7 are objected to as depending from a rejected base claim. Earlier rejections of
Claim 9 have been withdrawn.
Rejections of Claims 5 and 8 remain for our review. Claim 5 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102 as being anticipated by Kim. Claim 8 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Kim and Park.
We refer to the Final Rejection (Paper No. 7), the Examiner's Answer (Paper No. 14), the
Supplemental Answer (Paper No. 16), and the Second Supplemental Answer (Paper No. 18) for a
statement of the examiner's position and to the Brief (Paper No. 13), the Reply Brief (Paper No. 15),
and the Second Reply Brief (Paper No. 17) for appellant’s position.
OPINION
Claim 5 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102 as being anticipated by Kim. The examiner
contends that the claim reads on the structures of Kim as pointed out on pages 3 and 4 of the Answer.
Appellant submits two main arguments to the contrary. First, appellant submits that Kim “does
not disclose a cassette holder which ‘remains substantially level while ascending and descending
- 3 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007