Ex parte Bydalek

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

Jun 30, 1998

07971274 (B.P.A.I. Jun. 30, 1998)

Application for patent filed November 4, 1992.1
1
THIS OPINION WAS NOT WRITTEN FOR PUBLICATION
The opinion in support of the decision being entered today (1)
was not written for publication in a law journal and (2) is
not binding precedent of the Board.
Paper No. 14
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
_____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
_____________
Ex parte EDWARD BYDALEK
_____________
Appeal No. 95-3918
Application 07/971,2741
______________
ON BRIEF
_______________
Before MEISTER, STAAB and CRAWFORD, Administrative Patent
Judges.
CRAWFORD, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is a decision on an appeal from the examiner’s
final rejection of claims 1, 10-21, 26-31 and 33-34. Claims
2-9, 22-25 and 32 have been canceled.
Appeal No. 95-3918
Application 07/971,274
2
Appellant’s claimed subject matter is a disk holder
for mechanically retaining a computer disk and a storage
system for a plurality of computer disk or audio compact
disks. Claims 1 and 26 are exemplary of the subject matter on
appeal and recite:
1. A disk holder for mechanically retaining a
computer disk, audio compact disk or the like comprising an
integral frame having a base and upright walls, each upright
wall having a top, the tops of said upright walls being
substantially coplanar, a recess surrounded by said upright
walls and defined by said base and said walls, said recess
being disposed below the tops of said upright walls and above
the base, said walls, being disposed such that they retain a
computer disk and/or audio compact disk disposed in the recess
in place therein, said frame further including attachment
means for removably securing said frame to various structures,
said base be comprised of a plurality of ribs extending
inwardly from the upright walls, said upright walls being
disposed to provide a friction fit at the periphery of a disk
disposed in said recess such that said disk is held against
movement solely by the upright walls along its periphery.
26. A storage system for a plurality of computer
disk or audio compact disks comprising:
a foundation member;
a plurality of disk holders forming a stack of said
holders, each holder having an integral frame with a base and
upright walls, each upright wall having a top, the tops of
said upright walls being substantially coplanar, a recess
surrounded by said upright walls and defined by said base and
said walls, said recess being disposed below the tops of said
upright walls and above the base, said walls being disposed
such that they retain a disk disposed in the recess in place
therein, said base being comprised of a plurality of ribs
extending inwardly from the upright walls, said upright walls
Appeal No. 95-3918
Application 07/971,274
3
being disposed to provide a friction fit at the periphery of a
disk disposed in said recess such that said disk is held
against movement solely by the upright walls along its
periphery;
securing means for removably securing each disk
holder to the foundation member; and
a cover member, said plurality of disk holders being
removably secured by the securing means between the foundation
member and a first side of the cover member, said cover member
having a second side opposite the first side.

THE REFERENCES
The following references were relied on by the
examiner in support of the rejection:
Inaba et al. (Inaba) 4,327,831 May 4,
1982
Larson et al. (Larson) 4,550,355 Oct. 29,
1985
Spector 5,090,561 Feb. 25,
1992
(filed May 16,
1991)
THE REJECTIONS
Claims 1, 10-21, 26-31 and 33-34 stand rejected
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Inaba in view
of Larson and Spector.
Rather than reiterate the examiner’s full statement
of the above-noted rejection and the conflicting viewpoints
advanced by the examiner and the appellant regarding the
Appeal No. 95-3918
Application 07/971,274
4
rejection, we make reference to the Examiner’s Answer (Paper
No. 11) and the Appellants’ Brief (Paper No. 10) for the full
exposition thereof.
OPINION
We have carefully reviewed the appellant’s invention
as described in the specification, the appealed claims, the
prior art references applied by the examiner and the
respective positions advanced by the appellant and the
examiner. As a consequence of our review, we have made the
determination that the examiner’s rejection should not be
sustained.
We find that Inaba discloses a disk record container
in which a disk is retained in the container by two
cooperating plates in a sandwich configuration.
Larson discloses a disk cartridge with a base which
is comprised of a plurality of ribs.
Specter discloses a compact disc package having a
well with a diameter which substantially matches that of the
disc so that the disc is snugly received therein.
According to the examiner, it would have been
obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time
Appeal No. 95-3918
Application 07/971,274
5
the invention was made to provide the disk container of Inaba
with a base comprising a plurality of ribs extending inwardly
from the upright walls as shown by Larson so as to provide
structural support to the base housing of the disk container,
thereby preventing undue damage to the disk (Examiner’s Answer
at page 5). The examiner also reasons that it would have been
obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to furnish
the disk recorder container of Inaba with an interior wall
providing a friction fit at the periphery of the disk so that
the disc would have been released by flexing the disc holder
(Examiner’s Answer at page 6).
Appellants argue that Inaba requires two sides of a
holder to hold the disc in place while in appellant’s disc
holder the disc is held solely by friction fit.
We agree with appellants. In addition, as the disc
in Inaba is held in place by the cooperating plates, we can
ascertain no motivation in the prior art to modify Inaba so as
to provide a friction fit even if we assume that Specter
discloses a friction fit. Finally, as Inaba discloses a disc
with a hub which is held in place by cooperating plates,
Larson discloses a disk assembly in which the disk is held by
Appeal No. 95-3918
Application 07/971,274
6
a releasable hub locking mechanism and Spector disclose a disc
without a hub which is snugly fit in a well of a disk holder,
we are at a loss to understand how these desperate teachings
would be combined to produce a functioning device.
In view of the foregoing, we will not sustain the
examiner’s rejection.
REVERSED
)
JAMES M. MEISTER )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
LAWRENCE J. STAAB )
Administrative Patent Judge ) APPEALS AND
)
) INTERFERENCES
Appeal No. 95-3918
Application 07/971,274
7
)
MURRIEL E. CRAWFORD )
Administrative Patent Judge )
POLSTER, LIEDER, WOODRUFF
& LUCCHESI
763 SOUTH NEW ROAD
SUITE 160
ST. LOUIS, MO 63141