Appeal No. 96-1895
Application 08/011,682
The examiner relies on appellant's admission "that the
species of magnetic head, optical head and print head
positioning system are not believed to be patentably
distinct" (page 4 of the Amended Brief received
September 15, 1995, Paper No. 21) and the following prior
art:
Abed 4,949,201 August 14,
1990
Kanda et al. (Kanda) 5,168,398 December 1,
1992
(filed July 25,
1990)
B.P. Lathi, Modern Digital and Analog Communication
Systems, (2d ed., Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc.,
1989), pages 88-82.
The examiner has withdrawn the objection to the
specification under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph, for
failing to provide an adequate written description of the
invention and the best mode. The examiner had not rejected
any claims based on these grounds.
The examiner has also withdrawn the withdrawal of
claims 7 and 8 under 37 CFR § 1.142(b) as being directed to
non-elected species and has entered a new ground of
rejection as to these claims in the Examiner's Answer.
- 4 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007