Appeal No. 1998-3389
Application No. 08/386,794
that the read spot will not follow the centerline [in the second
mode], but instead follows the edge of the track" (column 2,
lines 23 to 26). This statement is further evidence that
centerline tracking for both modes of operation is in the
Background portion of Jongenelis.
The appellant also states (Brief, page 5) that:
it is important to recognize that Yoshio
et al. are only concerned with a single mode
of operation (i.e., reading only a single
type of optical record carrier having a
single track pitch). Thus, Yoshio et al. is
not a "dual-track-pitch" tracking system, but
rather, is a particular type of "single-
track-pitch" tracking system which uses a
novel mixing of different signals to produce
a "composite" tracking error signal which is
designed to overcome errors which are
encountered when the optical disk is radially
inclined and/or the lens in the optical
system is displaced off the optical axis.
We agree. Yoshio does not disclose a dual track pitch system
in the same vein as the claimed invention. In reference to the
Philips patent, the appellant argues that Philips does not
disclose "a 'dual-track-pitch' tracking system" but rather
another "particular type of 'single-track-pitch' tracking system"
(Brief page 5). We agree with appellant for the same reasons as
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007