Appeal No. 95-0355
Application 08/022,561
decode the claimed first and second signals, the examiner
states on page 6 of the answer that ?[t]he single demodulating
and decoding circuit . . . is interpreted . . . to be the
circuit of fig. 4 within [sic, in?] Ogawa et al..?
In addition to disputing the examiner’s position
regarding the step of utilizing a single circuit to demodulate
and decode the claimed first and second signals, appellants
advance the following arguments in support of patentability:
Ogawa, et al. disclose varying the track
width to record the addresses 4 of blocks
of signals. There is no disclosure in Ogawa
et al. of any track offsetting to prerecord
any sync signals, much less any frame sync
signals. Rijnsburger’s Figs. 3a-c, at best,
disclose offsetting the track width to
denote a ?sync? signal 43 which denotes the
beginning of each position-information
code. Page 4, lines 8-24. The offsetting
sync signal 43, even if incorporated into
Ogawa, et al.’s block data (comprising 98
frames) would still not produce a recording
medium on which reproduce-only frame sync
signals having the same signal format as
that of frame sync signals for the main
information data are previously recorded
for each frame by offsetting the recording
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007