Appeal No. 2002-1185
Application No. 09/112,242
We find that claim 24, without reciting any specific
description of the “backside” in relationship to the other sides,
reads on the tape paths disclosed in Figure 5 of Leonhardt. What
Appellants argue as paths that are not substantially parallel, as
elements 423 and 426, are in fact the paths that the tape travels
along while being loaded and are identified in Leonhardt as tape
threading path 423. This path indeed leads to three path
segments as the magnetic tape travels around fixed guided 408 and
411 before being positioned around read/write head 416 (col. 6,
lines 16-21). The first segment of the path extends along a
backside of tape drive (425, on the right-hand side), a second
segment which is parallel to the first one is along a backside of
tape cartridge 400 (425, on the left-hand side) and a third
segment is located between the other two segments adjacent to
tape head 416 (425, on the top side). Therefore, as the Examiner
has established a reasonable case of prima facie anticipation, we
sustain the 35 U.S.C. § 102 rejection of independent claim 24 and
claim 25, which is grouped therewith, over Leonhardt.
Turning now to claim 26, Appellants argue that the moveable
guides of Leonhardt do not move between the first and second
positions that are juxtaposed to the takeup reel (brief, page 8).
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007