Appeal No. 2001-2268
Application 08/922,581
The examiner indicates how he reads the invention of
these claims on the disclosure of Foelkel [answer, pages 3-4].
With respect to claim 1, appellants argue that Foelkel fails to
disclose a plunger arm that is linearly movable between a first
advanced position and a withdrawn position. Appellants also
argue that Foelkel does not disclose a plurality of cassette
holders disposed about a periphery of the turntable as claimed
[brief, pages 17-18]. The examiner responds that Foelkel does
disclose the plunger arm as indicated in the rejection. The
examiner also responds that the star arrangement of Foelkel does
have the cassette holders disposed about the periphery of the
turntable as claimed [answer, pages 9-10]. Appellants respond
that because the planes of the cassettes in Foelkel contain the
rotational axis of the turntable, the cassette holders are not
disposed about the periphery of the turntable as claimed [reply
brief, page 2].
We will sustain the examiner’s rejection of claim 1 for
essentially the reasons identified by the examiner.
Specifically, we agree with the examiner that the claimed plunger
arm can be read on cam 12. We disagree with appellants’ position
that cam 12 cannot reasonably be considered a plunger arm.
Appellants have offered no definition in the specification which
-7-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007