Appeal No. 1998-3389
Application No. 08/386,794
elimination of the drawbacks of the prior art discussed in the
'Background of the Invention' portion of their patent, which
Jongenelis et al. believed to be due to the use of centerline
tracking when reading in an optical record carrier of a second
type in a second mode of operation." Therefore, the Jongenelis
reference discloses that the use of centerline tracking during
both modes of operation is well known in the art. As the
previous passage from the Brief demonstrates, the appellant
readily admits that such is the case. The appellant is correct
in his characterization of the preferred embodiments of the
Jongenelis invention that they teach away from using centerline
tracking in both modes of operation, but it is also clear that
centerline tracking for both modes of operation is disclosed in
the Background of the Invention portion of Jongenelis and is
claimed in this instant application (Brief, pages 4 to 6). In
making a distinction between the acknowledged prior art and the
preferred embodiments, Jongenelis discloses that "[t]he electric
circuit gives the tracking servosystem an electrical offset so
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007