Appeal No. 2000-0373
Application No. 08/450,245
U.S.C. § 103.
With regard to independent claim 3, the examiner applies Precourt and Behrens
against this claim. More particularly, the examiner contends that Precourt discloses a write
signal processor 10, 12 and a write amplifier 16 for recording data, with the write signal
processor converting the write data into NRZI and wherein the write data is transmitted
between the write amplifier and the write signal processor in the NRZI code. The examiner
refers to column 3, lines 40-68 and Figure 1 of Precourt.
Admitting that Precourt does not teach a read/write signal processor and a
read/write amplifier, the examiner cites Behrens for such a teaching as well as converting
write data into NRZI code, referring to Figure 1 and column 1, lines 28-43 of Behrens.
Finally, the examiner concludes that it would have been obvious to modify Precourt
to include the teachings of Behrens because “it is well known in the art to use read/write
amplifiers and read/write signal processors” because they “help to simplify the circuit
construction, and save time and money” [answer-page 6].
Claim 3 requires that the read/write signal processor have a “conversion circuit for
converting the write data into a Non-Return-To-Zero-Interleaved (NRZI) code, whereby the
write data is transmitted between the read/write amplifier and the read/write signal
processor in the NRZI code.”
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007