Appeal No. 95-2218
Application 07/902,073
9. The Pederson reference teaches a window margining
method and apparatus for detecting defects on a hard disk.
(1:7-14.) Pederson lists many compelling reasons why a hard disk
designer would want a window margining defect detection system.
(1:15-3:34.) Pederson does not teach zone bit recording or the
circuitry needed for it, but none of Pederson's reasons for
having error-detection circuitry are unique to Pederson's
disclosed constant bit rate recorded hard disk system.
10. For the purposes of appeal, Appellant has conceded that
"Pederson's variable delay 22, window generator 26 and error
detector 32 . . . correspond[] to Appellant's claimed 'variable
delay means,' 'window pulse generating means' and 'detecting
means[]'", respectively. (Paper 14 at 9.) Appellant further
concedes that "Pederson's error detector 32 corresponds to the
claimed 'first comparator means[]'". (Paper 14 at 27.) The
examiner concedes that "Pederson does not have an element similar
to the DRDSS circuit." (Paper 9 at 4.) We find these
concessions to be consistent with the record.
11. Pederson's variable delay circuit 22 and window
generator 26 are coupled in common to the CLOCK signal. (7:37-
8:15; Fig. 2.) Pederson's error detector 32 is coupled to the
window generator 32 and (via multiplexer 28) to the variable
delay 22. (7:29-65; Fig. 2.) The window generator 26 includes a
- 4 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007