Appeal No. 95-2439
Application No. 08/080,353
We further disagree with appellants that there is no
motivation, from the prior art, “to adjust the drive’s reset
and seek parameters in response to the current available power
supplied to the disk drive unit” [brief, top of page 8].
While the applied references may not teach the adjustment
disclosed and intended by appellants, as was pointed out
supra, the adjustment, as broadly claimed, is believed to have
been suggested by Morimoto.
Since we have responded to all of appellants’ arguments
and the arguments do not convince us of any error in the
examiner’s rejection of the claimed subject matter set forth
in independent claim 1, we will sustain the examiner’s
rejection of claims 1 through 5 and 9 through 12 under 35
U.S.C. ' 103.
The examiner’s decision is affirmed.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in
connection with this appeal may be extended under 37 CFR
' 1.136 (a).
AFFIRMED
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007