Appeal No. 95-3570
Application 08/215,192
The examiner’s position here is not well founded. Arguably,
the approach time measurements and velocity demand profiles
utilized by Albert to control the voice coil actuator motor are
functions of the torque capability of the motor. Be this as it
may, it is not evident that persons of ordinary skill in the art
would recognize Albert’s use of the approach time measurements
and/or velocity demand profiles as necessarily meeting the
particular limitations in the appealed claims requiring the steps
of determining the actual torque capability of the motor,
determining a compensation factor from the actual and nominal
torque capabilities and driving the motor in proportion to the
compensation factor. The examiner’s finding to the contrary
lacks a sound factual basis, and is at best unduly speculative.
Accordingly, we shall not sustain the standing 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(e) rejection of claims 5, 6 and 9 as being anticipated by
Albert.
As a final matter, we note the substantial similarities
between the inventions defined by the claims in the instant
voluntarily filed continuation application and by the claims in
parent Application 07/738,793 which has matured into U.S. Patent
No. 5,305,160. Presumably, both the examiner and the appellants
have given due consideration to the double patenting issues
-6-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007