Appeal No. 1998-1677
Application No. 08/273,251
Upon our review of Grindley and Kanematsu, we fail to
find any suggestion as to why one of ordinary skill in the art
would choose to destroy a principal operation of Grindley, the
common capstan, in favor of using the Kanematsu mechanism. We
note that the Examiner's specific finding as to the suggestion
is simply a statement that Grindley and Kanematsu are used in
similar environments performing similar functions to acquire
similar results. Upon our review of Grindley and Kanematsu,
we do not find this to be true as pointed out above.
Therefore, we will not sustain the Examiner's rejection of
claims 17 and 19 under
35 U.S.C. § 103.
In view of the foregoing, the Examiner's decision is
reversed.
REVERSED
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007