Ex parte KAZMIERCZAK et al. - Page 3




          Appeal No. 97-3469                                                          
          Application 08/188,427                                                      

               Claim 1 is reproduced below.                                           
               1.   In a rotary actuator for positioning a dual gap                   
               transducing head relative to a track on a rotating                     
               recording medium, the medium rotating about a first axis               
               and the rotary actuator moving the head adjacent the                   
               medium about a second axis parallel to the first axis                  
               between an inner radial position adjacent an inner-most                
               track and an outer radial position adjacent an outer-most              
               track on the medium, the head comprising:                              
                    means for writing information on a recording medium,              
                         the means for writing information defining a                 
                         shadow over the track, the shadow having a width             
                         comprising the radial width of information                   
                         written on the track; and                                    
                    means for reading information from the recording                  
          medium                                                                      
                         wherein the reading means is spaced from the                 
                         writing means and located completely within the              
                         shadow of the writing means at all positions                 
                         between the inner and outer radial positions                 
                         over the rotating recording medium.                          

               The examiner relies on the following prior art:                        
               Mowry                5,208,715            May 4, 1993                  
               The specification stands objected to and claims 17-24 and              
          27-30 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph,                
          as failing to provide an enabling disclosure.                               
               Claims 1, 6, 11, and 15-30 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.              
          § 102(e) as being anticipated by, or in the alternative, under              
          § 103 as being unpatentable over Mowry.                                     

                                        - 3 -                                         





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007