Appeal No. 1997-2681
Application No. 08/211,414
information data filter of Fischler, just as the APA selects
between the servo data filter and the information data filter
(answer-page 7). Accordingly, we will sustain the Examiner’s
rejection of claim 1.
Claim 2
Appellant repeats the arguments made with respect to
claim 1 as being applicable with respect to claim 2. In
addition, Appellant emphasizes:
lines 13-18 of claim 2 specifically require that the
filter control means is “responsive to the outputs
of said first and second filter means” [emphasis by
Appellant]. Neither Appellant’s admitted prior art
nor Abbott teach or suggest that a filter is
programmed in response to the outputs of the
filters. Abbott merely teaches [] varying the
characteristic of a filter in response to a zone of
a disk from which data is read. (Reply brief-pages
5 and 6.)
The Examiner responds:
The admitted prior art Figure 1 shows the outputs of
filters 13 and 14 controlling signal controller 15.
See pages 1 and 2 of the specification. Moreover,
Abbott et al programs a filter in accordance with
the data transfer rate of a selected zone. See
column 10, lines 19-22 of Abbott et al. As noted on
page 8 of the Examiner’s Answer, “Abbott teaches in
fig. 4 programming the filter (40) via the
microcontroller (56) according to the selected
zone.” (Supplemental answer-page 3.)
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007