Appeal No. 96-3234
Application 08/184,446
predetermined rule" for error correction and interleaving
block code for a compact disk medium. Upon reviewing
Watkinson, as well as appellant's specification, we agree that
one of ordinary skill in the art would have been able to make
and use the recited address generating unit based upon "a
predetermined rule" for error-corrected and interleaving block
code for a compact disk medium. In particular, we note that
the prior art Watkinson clearly shows that the redundancy
symbols are calculated by a predetermined rule, in particular,
polynomial division. Furthermore, we note that the
Appellant's invention is not related to the development of a
new predetermined rule. The specification makes clear that
the invention is to be used using known error correction
detection methods and that the invention is directed to saving
memory space using these methods. Therefore, we will not
sustain the Examiner's rejection of claims 1 through 13 under
35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph.
Claims 1 through 4 and 7 through 12 are rejected
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being obvious over Ozaki. On page 2
of the Examiner's answer, the Examiner states that the
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007