Appeal No. 2002-1252
Application No. 09/362,583
Appellants’ counter is that Sato’s cassette carrier 20 moves
the cassettes between the vertical and horizontal postures for
transferring the cassettes between the slots 15 and the media
drives 18. Therefore, conclude appellants, “the slots 15 and the
media drives 18 are not co-planar because they have opposite
postures (vertical and horizontal)” (reply brief-page 2).
We understand the examiner’s position to be that, at some
point, when the cassette carrier 20 is at the top (as per Figure
1 of Sato), between media drive, or player unit, 18, and the
upper slots holding cassettes, 15, elements 15, 18 and 20 will be
aligned, or “co-planar,” since one can draw a single, common
plane through each of the elements.
We agree with appellants that Sato moves cassettes between
horizontal and vertical postures for transferring the cassettes
between the slots 15 and the media drives 18 and we are fully
aware of the differences between the instant disclosed invention
and that depicted by Sato. However, we do not believe that those
differences are brought out in the instant claimed invention.
The claim’s use of the term, “co-planar” is rather broad,
and we simply cannot see how that term may be applied to the
instant claimed invention but not to that shown by Sato.
While cassette carrier 20 may, at times, be aligned with the
-5–
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007