Appeal No. 1998-2497
Application No. 08/472,275
“positive”-information and “negative”-information (n+1)-bit
channel words has a spectral response that least deviates from
said prescribed spectral response.
The examiner relies on the following reference:
Kahlman et al. [Kahlman] 5,142,421 Aug. 25, 1992
Additionally, the examiner relies on Official Notice
“that the selection of parallel processing or serial
processing would have been an obvious design choice.” The
examiner also relies on the alleged admitted prior art [APA]
depicted in instant Figure 4, even though Figure 4 is not
labeled as prior art and, in fact, is described at page 5 of
the specification as an “improved control signal generator for
the digital signal recording apparatus shown in FIGURE 3."
Claims 1-11 and 15-31 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103.
As evidence of obviousness, the examiner offers Kahlman in
view of Official Notice with regard to claims 1-3, 10, 11, 15-
21 and 27, adding APA to this combination with regard to
claims 4-9, 22-26 and 28-31.
Reference is made to the brief and answer for the
respective positions of appellant and the examiner.
4–
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007