Appeal No. 2007-0464
Application 09/964,874
the examiner’s cited support in Otsuka-English for the applicant to address or rebut if the
applicant’s position is that the cited paragraphs do not disclose the setting and resetting of the
tracking offset. The applicant chose not to address the cited portions of Otsuka-English.
For the foregoing reasons, we reject the applicant’s argument that the examiner has not
adequately explained the basis of the anticipation rejection of claim 24 over Otsuka.
The Obviousness Rejection of Claims 10 and 11
over Kulakowski, and either Tsuchimochi or Tsutsui
Kulakowski discloses an optical disk drive in which a sensor measures the operating
temperature of the device and the measured temperature is compared with two threshold values
(FF. 20). Kulakowski discloses that if the measured temperature exceeds a first threshold
temperature, a microprocessor adjusts the duty cycle of the disk drive by inhibiting high
temperature write and erase operations, and if the measured temperature exceeds the second
threshold temperature, a control circuit further inhibits read and verify operations as well
(FF.21). Kulakowski discloses that as a consequence of the inhibitions the temperature of the
disk drive can be controlled to stay within a predetermined range and the system provides a way
to address the heat generation problem associated with computer peripheral equipment (FF. 21).
Kulakowski does not disclose changing or modifying the focus or tracking offset value of the
optical disk drive at any time (FF. 22).
Independent claim 10 requires measuring of the temperature at startup of the optical disk
drive and measuring the temperature again sometime after startup of the optical disk drive, and
determining when the difference of those two measured temperatures has exceeded a
predetermined level. Claim 10 further requires that when the difference in the two measured
14
Page: Previous 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013