Appeal No. 1997-4446
Application No. 08/278,151
In rejecting the claims over Appellants' Admitted Prior Art
(AAPA) in view of Yamashita under 35 U.S.C. § 103, the
examiner recognizes (Final Rejection, page 6) that AAPA does
not store the actuator control signals. Therefore, the
examiner turns to Figure 7 of Yamashita, asserting that D/A
converter 35 receives a signal from RAMs 44 and 45. From this
the examiner concludes (Final Rejection, page 7) that
it would have been obvious to one having ordinary
skill in the art to have applied Yamashita's
teachings to AAPA. The motivation for this
modification would have been to adapt the closed
loop AAPA operation to a plurality of actuators. As
stated by Yamashita on lines 60-64 of column 2, this
combination would record signals with high fidelity,
maximize read back output, and increase tolerance
for slight differences in components.
However, the examiner has not provided a reason from some
teaching, suggestion or implication in Yamashita or the prior
art as a whole why one having ordinary skill in the pertinent
art would have been led to modify AAPA to arrive at the
claimed invention.
As explained by appellants (Brief, pages 20-21) Yamashita
is directed to obtaining an ideal supply voltage signal which
will yield the maximum reproduction output for a single head.
Yamashita determines the best supply voltage signal by
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007