Appeal No. 1998-1655 Page 18
Application No. 08/367,766
Claims 8-10, 12-19, 21, 22, and 26-29
The appellants argue, "[t]he claims do recite that
sufficient pressing force to deform at least one of the first
or second surfaces (or similar language) is required by the
invention, but neither Yamada et al nor any of the other
references of record teach deformation." (Reply Br. at 6-7.)
The examiner responds, "Yamada et al must necessarily apply
some pressing force, which would enable the disc inside to
rotate. Since different forces would be needed for more or
less 'deformation', and the claims do not set forth these
forces, the Examiner maintains that Yamada et al is still
properly applied." (Examiner's Answer at 9.)
Claims 8-10, 21, and 26 specify in pertinent part the
following limitations: "pressing a second main surface of said
cartridge toward said first main surface with sufficient
pressing force to undeform at least one of the first and
second main surfaces." Similarly, claims 12-19, 22, 27, and
28 specify in pertinent part the following limitations: "a
first main surface of the cartridge is pressed against the
first support member and a second main surface of the
Page: Previous 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007