Appeal No. 1998-0696 Page 5 Application No. 08/444,664 We fail to follow the examiner’s reasoning. Hanson is concerned with increasing head sensitivity by reversing bias current direction dependent on the position of a given burst pattern with respect to the center of the servo pattern and does not appear to be concerned at all with the problem of the instant claimed invention which is to limit the range of motion of the read element to be equidistant from the track center when the magnetoresistive head is reading, writing or formatting. Although appellants make this argument, as well as point to specific claim limitations which are believed not suggested by the applied references [brief, pages 8-10], the examiner’s response is merely to state [answer-page 7] that “[i]f two places are ‘mirrored’ about a central location, they are equally distant from each other” and that the examiner relies on APA for the claimed range of motion limitations. The examiner’s response is not persuasive to us that the skilled artisan would have been led, from Hanson’s teaching of reversing current flow in a magnetoresistive head to correct for the head’s asymmetric response, to modify APA to provide for a range of motion of the read element to be equidistant from the center of the track during the three functions ofPage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007