Appeal No. 2004-0530
Application No. 09/696,557
invention. (See Specification and Briefs generally). According to the Appellants, Figures
2 and 3 are illustrative of a tape head data track positioning system using servo tracts and
asymmetric servo readers. (Specification, pp. 8-9).
To determine if the prior art magnetic tape head assembly of Figure 1 is the same
as the claimed invention we must to look at the arrangement of the servo readers on the
tape head of the prior art magnetic tape head assembly. The claimed invention requires
all of the servo readers to be placed asymmetrically about the center of the tape head
taken perpendicular to the direction of the tape motion. Looking at the center of the tape
head of Figure 1 taken perpendicular to the direction of the tape motion, we determine
that servo readers are symmetric, i.e., 110 and 111 are symmetric to servo readers 112 and
113 respectively. The Examiner has not directed us to evidence that all of the servo
readers 110-113 are arranged asymmetrically.
The Examiner’s rejection under § 103 fails for the same reasons presented above.
The addition of the Dee reference does not remedy the differences between the claimed
invention and the prior art depicted by Figure 1.
We note that the Examiner has not rejected the independent claims 1, 10 and 15
under § 103 over the prior art depicted by Figure 1. The Examiner has failed to address
whether it would have been obvious to exclude some of the servo readers and their
-5-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007