Appeal No. 1998-1655 Page 23
Application No. 08/367,766
...." Accordingly, the limitations require contacting the
second main surface of the disk cartridge with a planar, inner
wall surface of a cartridge holder.
The examiner fails to show a teaching of the limitations
in the prior art. Although Yamada teaches holding a disk
cartridge in a frame, the cartridge does not touch a planar,
inner wall surface of the frame. To the contrary, the disk
cartridge contacts pins, projections, and a spring that touch
the top and bottom surfaces of the cartridge. Because Yamada
teaches contacting the disk cartridge with pins, projections,
and a spring, we are not persuaded that the reference
discloses the claimed limitations of "said cartridge holder
ha[ving] an inner wall surface that is planar and sufficiently
extensive to contact a major portion of the second main
surface under the pressing force ...." Therefore, we reverse
the rejection of claim 23 as anticipated by Yamada.
The examiner also fails to show a suggestion of the
limitations in the prior art. “Obviousness may not be
established using hindsight or in view of the teachings or
Page: Previous 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007