Appeal No. 1997-3973
Application No. 08/366,561
Turning to the obviousness rejection, appellants
acknowledge (Brief, page 17) that it is known to short the
inputs to an amplifier with a switch. Notwithstanding the
amplifier shorting knowledge in the art, appellants argue
(Brief, page 20) that “[t]he claims all contain clearly
patentable distinctions over the prior art.” With respect to
claims 7 through 10 and 12, we agree with appellants’ argument
(Brief, page 20) that the applied references fail to teach
that the “shorting switch ‘is connected to logic responsive to
initiation of read conditions to short out, for a period, said
input connections when full bias current is restored to said
magnetoresistive sensing element after having been reduced
thereon . . .’” With respect to claims 19 and 27, we also
agree with appellants’ argument (Brief, page 20) that the
applied references fail to teach “the step of ‘shorting
together said inputs of said preamplifier stage, for a limited
time, each time a current generator switches on and initiates
the providing of bias current upon a transition from write
mode to read mode.’” With respect to claims 28 and 29, we
likewise agree with appellants’ argument (Brief, page 20) that
the applied references fail to teach the ultimate limitation
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007