Appeal No. 1997-1323
Application No. 08/117,997
Appellants argue (Brief, page 6) that:
[W]hile Takasago teaches an apparatus which
attempts to distinguish between an off-track
condition caused by an abnormality in the disk
and an off-track condition caused by an abnormality
in the operation of the disk apparatus, it does so
by measuring the time duration of the off-track
condition. The present invention, on the other
hand, bases its decision on the number of tracks
jumped, regardless of the time duration of any
off-track condition.
We agree with appellants’ argument that the measurement
of time duration of the pulse signal “1" is not the same
as counting the number of such pulses that occur during
a predetermined time period. In summary, the 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(b)/35 U.S.C. § 103 rejections of claims 1, 2, 4 through
6, 8, 9 and 11 are reversed because Takasago neither teaches
nor would have suggested the claimed counting of off-track
pulses.
The 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejections of claims 3, 7, 10 and 12
are reversed because the teachings of Yamamiya and Yoshida do
not cure the noted shortcomings in the teachings of Takasago.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007