Appeal No. 96-3420
Application 08/164,783
Horie’s Figure 3 suggests that the postulated condition
cannot occur because the track position detection step 308
occurs after the predetermined time expires at step 307.
Column 4, lines 36-49. Since we are unable to find that the
condition could occur in Horie, we are unable to assume that
Horie has a procedure or means for handling the condition.
The examiner’s interpretation of Horie is creative and
within the realm of possibilities, but is too speculative to
support the present rejection. The examiner does not rely on
the admitted prior art to bolster that interpretation. Upon
our own review, we are unable to find any additional support
for the rejection in Horie or in the admitted prior art.
Therefore, we will not sustain the rejection.
CONCLUSION
The rejection of Claims 1-6, 8-15, and 17-21 is not
sustained.
REVERSED
JAMES D. THOMAS )
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007