Appeal No. 2002-1233 Page 2
Application No. 09/187,138
BACKGROUND
The appellants' invention relates to a tape drive head cleaner that uses a
cleaning pad mounted in the tape drive (specification, p. 1). A copy of the claims under
appeal is set forth in the appendix to the appellants' brief.
The prior art references of record relied upon by the examiner in rejecting the
appealed claims are:
Saito et al. (Saito) 5,383,076 Jan. 17, 1995
Inoue et al. (Inoue) 5,469,318 Nov. 21, 1995
Fritsch et al. (Fritsch) 6,028,751 Feb. 22, 2000
Claims 2, 4, 5 and 7 to 13 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Inoue in view of Fritsch.
Claims 3, 14 to 18 and 20 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Saito in view of Fritsch.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and
the appellants regarding the above-noted rejections, we make reference to the answer
(Paper No. 14, mailed July 31, 2001) for the examiner's complete reasoning in support
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007