Appeal No. 2005-1869
Application No. 09/902,051
Therefore, the filter 112 is responsive to the thermal asperity
signal “in accordance with said data rate” since the filter is
responsive to the thermal asperity signal no matter what the
actual data rate is in Patti and that is all the instant claim
language requires.
Based on our discussion and interpretation of the instant
claim language supra, there is no need for any circuit in Patti
to determine a data rate, as argued by appellants. The
programmable thermal asperity recovery circuit 102 need not be
adjusted based on different data rates because the instant claims
do not require such a data rate determining circuit or different
data rates.
Accordingly, since we find that the examiner has presented a
prima facie case of anticipation and that appellants have not
successfully rebutted such prima facie case, the decision of the
examiner rejecting claims 1-10 under 35 U.S.C. §102 (e) is
affirmed.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007