Appeal 2007-3939
Application 10/448,725
The Examiner rejected claims 1-6 and 8-19 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b)
as being anticipated by Calfee.
Rather than reiterate the opposing arguments, we refer to the Brief and
the Answer for the respective positions of Appellant and the Examiner.
ISSUE
The issue is whether Appellant has shown that the Examiner erred in
rejecting the appealed claims under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as anticipated by
Calfee.
FINDINGS OF FACT
The following findings of fact (FF) are relevant to the issue at hand.
1. Calfee relates to data recording disk drives and means for
releasing the disk drive carrier from the disk when the carrier is stuck to disk
surface (col. 1, ll. 6-11).
2. Calfee discloses that when the rotor becomes stuck, because the
position of the rotor relative to the phase windings at startup is not known,
inappropriate phase windings relative to the rotor may be energized,
generating magnetic fields that induce little or no torque to rotate the rotor
(col. 2, ll. 34-38).
3. In order to ensure that proper phase windings are energized,
Calfee uses sensing devices, such as Hall sensors, to determine the rotor
position relative to the windings at startup. Once the rotor position is
determined, appropriate windings can be energized to provide maximum
torque to the rotor. The rotor position can also be used to energize
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013