Appeal No. 1995-2838
Application 07/966,707
tapered toward an outside of slider 4" (EA4). The statement
of the rejection is not specific about which surface in Fig. 7
is referred to. By itself, we would interpret the statement
as referring to the lower portion of the wall surface 8c" to
be consistent with the final rejection. However, later in the
examiner's answer the Examiner states (EA7):
Figure 7, does show what Appellant purports Katagiri
discloses: inclined surface 8c" tapered toward the inside
of slider 4 and engaging complementary tapered surface
6b; however, Katagiri additionally shows surface 8c"
inclined and tapered toward an outside of slider 4 and
engaging complementary tapered surface 6a, as set forth
in appealed claim 1. Moreover, since Appellant recites
"A tape cassette comprising:" in line 1 of claims 1 and
4, the applied references are not precluded from
disclosing inclined surface tapered inwardly as well as
outwardly.
Thus, in the examiner's answer, the Examiner for the first
time asserts that he relies on the upper portion of the wall
surface 8c" which is capable of engaging the rear tip face of
protrusion 6a, as opposed to the lower portion of the wall
surface 8c" which actually engages the rear end face of
protrusion 6a. Appellant had an opportunity to respond in the
reply brief.
Appellant responds that the tapered portion with the
surface 8c" is not tapered toward an outside (RBr1-2). As to
- 6 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007