Appeal No. 1999-2705
Application 08/686,756
individual magnetic write heads in a matrix recording head.
The Examiner's reliance on Christner and Masaki being in the
general field of disk storage mediums does not provide
motivation for the specific modifications needed and,
moreover, it ignores the fundamental differences between the
optical recording in Masaki and the magnetic recording in the
present invention. We conclude that the Examiner has
improperly implied hindsight in making the rejection and has
failed to establish a prima facie case of obviousness as to
claim 1. The rejection of claim 1 and its dependent claims 2-
8 is reversed.
Claims 13-16
The Examiner finds that Lehureau teaches the claimed
apparatus of claim 13 except (FR5): "Lehureau does not teach
a control unit, a controllable current source, and a
non-volatile memory." In addition, Lehureau does not teach a
common controller circuit. In other words, Lehureau teaches a
matrix-type recording head but does not otherwise teach
anything about Appellant's invention.
Claim 13 contains apparatus limitations corresponding to
the method of claim 1 and is more detailed. The Examiner's
- 9 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007