Appeal No. 1998-1472 Page 25
Application No. 08/427,721
suggestion of the claimed means for varying the diffraction
efficiency of each holographic grating during its creation in
the optical disk.” (Appeal Br. at 14.) The examiner replies,
“In Murakami, the different sizes and depths of the pits,
which create the difference in the intensity of the reflected
light, is created by a recording light having an intensity
which is varied proportionate to the different size and depth
of the pits, (i.e., the higher the intensity of the beam, the
larger/deeper the pit).” (Examiner’s Answer at 7-8.)
Claim 144 specifies in pertinent part the following
imitations: “each holographic grating has a variable
diffraction efficiency and wherein the detecting means is
capable of producing a signal proportional to the diffraction
efficiency of a holographic grating whenever detected, said
signal being indicative of a value of the stored data element
represented by the detected holographic grating.” Similarly,
claim 153 specifies in pertinent part the following
limitations: “each holographic grating has a variable
diffraction efficiency and wherein: the reading step comprises
the step of producing a signal proportional to the diffraction
Page: Previous 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007