Ex Parte GAVIT et al - Page 3




          Appeal No. 2001-2268                                                        
          Application 08/922,581                                                      


               (d) a rotary drive operative to rotate said turntable                  
          thereby to consecutively move each of said cassette holders into            
          registration with said docking station; and                                 
               (e) a plunger arm linearly movable between a first advanced            
          position and a withdrawn position, said plunger arm operative               
          when advanced to pivot a registered one of said cassette holders            
          into the extended position thereby to move the cassette received            
          therein into the docking station and into a docked state with               
          respect to said recorder/reader and operative when withdrawn to             
          permit said registered one of said cassette holders to pivot into           
          a retracted position thereby to demount the cassette received               
          therein from the recorder/reader so that said cassette moves to a           
          stored state.                                                               
          The examiner relies on the following reference:                             
          Foelkel et al. (Foelkel)      3,617,066          Nov. 2, 1971               
          Claims 24-28 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second                   
          paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point            
          out and distinctly claim the subject matter which applicant                 
          regards as the invention.  Claims 1, 3, 6, 10, 29, 37 and 43                
          stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by             
          the disclosure of Foelkel.  Claims 4, 5, 9, 11 and 16-23 stand              
          rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103.  As evidence of obviousness the             
          examiner offers Foelkel taken alone.                                        
          Rather than repeat the arguments of appellants or the                       
          examiner, we make reference to the briefs and the answer for the            
          respective details thereof.                                                 



                                         -3-                                          





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007