Appeal No. 96-1346
Application 08/122,611
After consideration of the positions and arguments presented by both the examiner and the
appellant, we have concluded that the rejection should be sustained. We agree in general with the
comments made by the examiner; we add the following discussion for emphasis.
We find no merit to appellant’s position to the effect that Sugiyama does not rely on track pre-
pits 70, 71 to discriminate between odd and even tracks. That part of Sugiyama’s disclosure relied on
by appellant in support of this position, column 10, lines 26-41, does not establish that discrimination
between odd and even tracks in the reference stems from a determination of whether the pre-pit pair 7
or pre-pit pair 8 precedes the other for generation of a track inversion signal. This portion of the
disclosure indicates how the sequence of the pre-pits is recognized, but does not indicate that such
sequences are utilized to discriminate between odd and even tracks. In contrast, the examiner has
drawn attention to portions of Sugiyama’s disclosure which in fact establish that pre-pits 70 and 71 are
utilized to discriminate between odd and even tracks. Attention has been drawn to the fact that in
Sugiyama’s apparatus, the tracking polarity inverting circuit 90 of Figure 6 is controlled by a polarity
inverting order signal 91, which happens to be the output signal from timing generation circuit 93 of
Figure 5b. As noted by the examiner, the output signal of 93 is dependent on input signals at inputs 95
and 96, which signals are derived from light receiving planes 81, 82 (Figure 1). Column 6, line 54 to
column 7, line 28, in turn discloses that the inputs from planes 81, 82 depend on returning light power
from pre-pits 70 and 71, which are disposed alternately on odd and even recording tracks.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007