Appeal No. 1998-2502
Application No. 08/525,007
does not appear to us that there is any “prior attempt” in
Numasaki to transfer the data storing device nor is there a
repositioning of the carriage after such a “prior attempt.”
In Numasaki, there is one attempt at alignment. If the
carrier frame is perfectly aligned and slips right into the
slot, this is ideal but if the alignment is slightly off, the
carrier frame is still inserted, albeit by possibly more
force, as the tapered ends of catching blade 101 are easily
forced between holding rollers 105 (see Figures 21A and 21B of
Numasaki). Numasaki does not make another attempt by
displacing the carriage to a new position after a “prior
attempt.” The process appears to be performed in one, single
action.
To the extent the examiner is construing Numasaki’s
detection of the carrier frame as being slightly off
horizontal as a “prior attempt” to transfer the storing device
and the forcing of catching blade 101 between holding rollers
105 as a displacement from a first position to a new position
(see the difference in position from Figure 21A to Figure 21B
in Numasaki) responsive to this “prior attempt,” we note
appellants’ reliance on In re Donaldson Co., 16 F.3d 1189, 29
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007