Appeal No. 2002-1252
Application No. 09/362,583
slots holding cassettes 15 and, at other times, it may be aligned
with the port of media drive 18, it does not appear to us that
all three elements can ever be aligned at the same time in Sato
because, as far as we can tell, the port of media drive 18 and
the slots holding cassettes 15 are oriented perpendicular to each
other. However, as shown in the drawings, three elements appear
to be “co-planar” in the same sense as appellants’ elements.
The problem is, of course, the meaning to be ascribed the
term “co-planar.” This term typically applies to elements that
are in the same plane so that a plane in which one element is a
member will also include the other elements. This is easily
understood when the elements have but one or two dimensions.
However, when elements, such as slots, media drives and robotic
mechanisms, have three dimensions, the term “co-planar” is not so
clear. For example, since the slots, the media drive and the
robotic mechanism all have some depth to them in a direction
perpendicular to the page, what does it mean to say that these
elements are “co-planar”? Are the three-dimensional elements
themselves co-planar (this would be non-sensical) or is it some
surface of these elements, like the edge of the media drive
housing, or the plane across the opening of the slots, etc. which
are co-planar? When the claims recite the “media drive” as being
-6–
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007