Ex Parte Keizer et alDownload PDFPatent Trial and Appeal BoardMay 4, 201612357168 (P.T.A.B. May. 4, 2016) Copy Citation UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR 12/357, 168 0112112009 Richard Lyle Keizer 136310 7590 05/06/2016 Faegre Baker Daniels LLP PA TENT DOCKETING - INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY 2200 WELLS FARGO CENTER 90 SOUTH SEVENTH STREET MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402-3901 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE United States Patent and Trademark Office Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS P.O. Box 1450 Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450 www .uspto.gov ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO. STL14686 1160 EXAMINER TZENG, FRED ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER 2695 NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE 05/06/2016 ELECTRONIC Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding. The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication. Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the following e-mail address( es): PatentDocketing@FaegreBD.com PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07) UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD Ex parte RICHARD LYLE KEIZER, MUST AF A CAN OZTURK, and PUSKALPRASADPOKHAREL Appeal2014-008051 Application 12/357,168 Technology Center 2600 Before LARRY J. HUME, NORMAN H. BEAMER, and JOHN D. HAMANN, Administrative Patent Judges. BEAMER, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL Appellants 1 appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) the Examiner's Final Rejection of claims 1, 16, 20, and 21. Claim 13 is cancelled, and claims 2- 12, 14, 15, and 17-19 are objected to. We have jurisdiction over the pending rejected claims under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b ). We reverse. 1 Appellants identify Seagate Technology as the real party in interest. (App. Br. 2.) Appeal2014-008051 Application 12/357, 168 THE INVENTION Appellants' disclosed and claimed invention is directed to generation of a frequency acquisition error compensated position error signal using servo burst signals in a servo control loop. (Abstract.) Claim 1, reproduced below, is illustrative of the claimed subject matter: 1. A circuit comprising: a demodulation module that at least partially removes an effect of frequency acquisition error on a position error signal (PES) using servo readback signals read from a sequence of at least one part of a split first servo burst pattern, a second servo burst pattern, and another part of the split first servo burst pattern on a moving storage media to generate a frequency acquisition error compensated PES component. REJECTION The Examiner rejected claims 1, 16, 20, and 21 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by Cheung et al. (US 5,774,298, issued June 30, 1998). (Final Act. 3--4.)2 ISSUE ON APPEAL Appellants' arguments in the Appeal Brief present the following dispositive issue: 3 2 The Examiner objected to claims 2-12, 14, 15, and 17-19 as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would allow those claims if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. (Final Act. 5.) 3 Rather than reiterate the arguments of Appellants and the positions of the Examiner, we refer to the Appeal Brief (filed Apr. 22, 2014); the Reply 2 Appeal2014-008051 Application 12/357, 168 Whether the Examiner cited portions of Cheung discloses the independent claim 1 limitation, "using servo readback signals read from a sequence of at least one part of a split first servo burst pattern, a second servo burst pattern, and another part of the split first servo burst pattern on a moving storage media," and the similar limitation recited in independent claims 16 and 20. (Br. 4--5.) ANALYSIS For the claim limitation at issue, the Examiner relies on the disclosure in Cheung of using servo burst patterns distributed along the tracks of a magnetic tape. (Final Act. 3--4; Ans. 2-3; Cheung Figs. 8, 9, col. 11, 1. 34-- col. 12, 1. 8.) Appellants argue that the particular burst patterns relied on by the Examiner do not include "another part of the split first servo burst pattern," as required by the claims. The Examiner responds that, under a broad interpretation of the claim language, the particular burst patterns relied upon do comply with the claim requirement. (Ans. 2.) Appellants' argument is persuasive - none of the burst patterns the Examiner points to satisfy the requirement, "another part of the split first servo burst pattern." None of the burst patterns used in Cheung satisfy the sequence: "one part of a split first servo burst pattern, a second servo burst pattern, and another part of the split first servo burst pattern." As Appellants correctly point out, the burst patterns relied upon by the Examiner- e.g., "P12 is the first part of the splitted first servo burst Pl, and Brief (filed Jul. 18, 2014); the Final Office Action (mailed Nov. 19, 2013); and the Examiner's Answer (mailed Jul. 16, 2014) for the respective details. 3 Appeal2014-008051 Application 12/357, 168 P 11 is the another part of the splitted first servo burst Pl (see figure 8)" - are actually separate portions of two different burst patterns on separate tracks, even though both patterns are labelled "Pl." (Ans. 2; App. Br. 6.) Therefore, on the record before us, we are constrained to find the Examiner errs in rejecting independent claims 1, 16 and 20. CONCLUSION For the reasons stated above, we do not sustain the anticipation rejection of independent claims 1, 16, and 20. We also do not sustain the anticipation rejection of claim 21, which depends from claim 1. DECISION The Examiner's rejection of claims 1, 16, 20, and 21 is reversed. 4 REVERSED 4 Should there be further proceedings on this Application, the Examiner may wish to consider whether certain of the claims are subject to the requirements of 35 U.S.C. § 112, i-f 6 and, if so, whether such claims are in the form of a "single means claim," and thus invalid. See Williamson v. Citrix Online, LLC, 792 F. 3d 1339 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (en bane); In re Hyatt, 708 F.2d 712, 714-715 (Fed. Cir. 1983). 4 Copy with citationCopy as parenthetical citation