Ex parte Shrinkle

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

Oct 30, 2000

08610976 (B.P.A.I. Oct. 30, 2000)

-1-
The opinion in support of the decision being entered
today was not written for publication and is not
precedent of the Board.
Paper No. 24
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
________________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
________________
Ex parte LOUIS J. SHRINKLE
________________
Appeal No. 1998-0817
Application 08/610,976
________________
ON BRIEF
________________
Before JERRY SMITH, FLEMING and BARRY, Administrative Patent
Judges.
FLEMING, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is a decision on appeal from the final rejection of
claims 14-24. Claims 1-13 have been canceled.
The invention relates to controlling a frequency at which
data are written onto a disk in a disk drive system. On page
6 of the application, Appellant discloses that figure 2 shows
Appeal No. 1998-0817
Application 08/610,976
-2-
a disk drive system that embodies the invention and includes a
microprocessor 9 for controlling the overall operation of the
disk drive system, a read channel 10 for recovering data read
from the disk, a write channel 12 for writing data onto the
disk, an a digital phase locked loop 11 for providing a read
clock to the read channel 10 and a write clock to the write
channel 12, and a reference oscillator 13 connected to the
phase locked
loop 11 to act as the center frequency of operations of the
phase locked loop to which correction will be made. On pages
7 and 8 of the application, Appellant discloses that the speed
of the spindle motor of the disk drive system is monitored to
detect differences between the specified nominal speed to the
spindle motor and the actual speed of the spindle motor.
Microprocessor 9 generates a digital correction value for use
by the phase locked loop that would change the write clock
frequency of the phase locked loop so as to compensate for the
variation in the speed of the spindle motor.
Independent claim 14 is reproduced as follows:
14. An apparatus for generating an adjusted clock signal
having a frequency and phase based on format data in a record
stored on a rotating disk in a disk drive system, the
Appeal No. 1998-0817
Application 08/610,976
Appellant filed an appeal brief on June 6, 1997. 1
Appellant filed a reply brief on October 2, 1997. The
Examiner mailed a communication on October 15, 1997 stating
that the reply brief has been entered and considered.
-3-
apparatus comprising:
means for reading the format data in the record stored on
the rotating disk;
a phase locked loop responsive to the format data for
generating a first clock signal;
means for monitoring actual rotational speed of the
rotating disk; and
means responsive to the monitoring means for controlling
the phase locked loop to adjust the first clock signal to have
a frequency and phase that is compensated for changes in the
actual rotational speed of the rotating disk.
The references relied on by the Examiner are as follows:
Gold 5,231,545 Jul. 27,
1993
Rooke 5,535,067 Jul. 9, 1996
Claims 14-20 and 22 through 24 stand rejected under 35
U.S.C. § 102 as being anticipated by Rooke. Claim 21 stands
rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over
Rooke in view of Gold.
Rather than repeat the arguments of Appellant or the
Examiner, we make reference to the briefs and answer for the1
Appeal No. 1998-0817
Application 08/610,976
-4-
details thereof.
OPINION
After careful review of the evidence before us, we do not
agree with the Examiner that claims 14-20 and 22-24 are
anticipated by the applied references.
It is axiomatic that anticipation of a claim under § 102
can be found only if the prior art reference discloses every
element of the claim. See In re King, 801 F.2d 1324, 1326,
231 USPQ 136, 138 (Fed. Cir. 1986) and Lindemann
Maschinenfabrik GMBH v. American Hoist & Derrick Co., 730 F.2d
1452, 1458, 221 USPQ 481, 485 (Fed. Cir. 1984).
On pages 6 and 7 of the brief, Appellant points out that
claim 14 recites:
A phase locked loop responsive to format data
for generating a first clock signal;
means for monitoring actual rotational speed of the
rotating disk; and
means responsive to the monitoring loop means for
controlling the phase locked loop to adjust the
first clock signal to have a frequency and phase
that is compensated for changes in the actual
Appeal No. 1998-0817
Application 08/610,976
-5-
rotational speed of the rotating disk.
Appellant further points out that Rooke describes a
multiplexer 30 to permit selection of a reference signal
source as either reference signal 17 read from a disk or
reference signal 29 originating from the spindle control
provider. Appellant argues that Rooke does not teach using
both signals, only that a choice may be made between the two
signals. Appellant argues that Rooke does not lock onto a
frequency of the data recorded on the disk and does not adjust
a write clock signal generated based upon a data frequency for
the spindle speed variation. On pages 11 through 12,
Appellant further argues that Rooke does not disclose a phase
locked loop as required by claim 14.
The Examiner states on page 3 of the answer that the
rejection is set forth in paragraph 3 of the prior office
action, paper no. 12. Turning to the prior office action, we
find that in regard to claim 14, Examiner states that Rooke
teaches means for reading format data, (6 and 17), a PLL,
(28), means for monitoring actual rotation speed, (3), and
means responsive to monitoring means for controlling the PLL
to adjust the first clock signal to a frequency and phase that
Appeal No. 1998-0817
Application 08/610,976
-6-
is compensated for change in the actual rotation speed, (3).
Examiner points to figure 8.
Turning to Rooke, we find that Rooke teaches in col. 7,
lines 14-21, that figure 8 depicts a disk drive system
allowing a selection of reference signals through a
multiplexor (30). Rooke states that a choice is given between
reference signal 17 originating from the disk pattern and a
reference signal 29 originating from the controller pattern.
We fail to find that Rooke teaches a means responsive to the
monitoring means for controlling the phase locked loop to
adjust the first clock signal to a frequency and phase that is
compensated for changes in the actual rotational speed of the
rotating disk.
We find that Appellant's claim 18 recites "means for
compensating the generated clock signal during the write
operation as a function of the actual rotating speed of the
rotating disk, to produce a corrected clock signal." We note
that Appellant's claim 19 recites "compensating the generated
clock signal during the write operation, as a function of the
actual rotational speed of the rotating disk, to produce a
corrected clock signal." We also note that Appellant's claim
Appeal No. 1998-0817
Application 08/610,976
-7-
20 recites "a phase locked loop, in response to the control
signals generated by the microprocessor, for receiving the
format data read by the read channel during the write
operation and for generating a clock having a frequency and
phase that is equal to the frequency and phase of the format
data read from the format portion of the record compensated
for the deviation in the actual rotational speed of the disk
from its nominal speed." We fail to find that Rooke teaches
these limitations as well.
Therefore, we do not agree with the Examiner that claims
14-20 and 22-24 are anticipated by Rooke. Furthermore, we
note that the rejection of claim 21 is based upon finding
these limitations in Rooke. Therefore, we do not agree that
claim 21 which is
dependent upon claim 20 is properly rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 as being unpatentable in view of Rooke and Gold for the
reasons given above with respect to claim 20.
In view of the foregoing the decision of the Examiner
rejected claims 14 through 24 is reversed.
Appeal No. 1998-0817
Application 08/610,976
-8-
REVERSED
JERRY SMITH )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
)
MICHEAL R. FLEMING ) BOARD OF PATENT
Administrative Patent Judge ) APPEALS AND
) INTERFERENCES
)
)
LANCE LEONARD BARRY )
Administrative Patent Judge )
MRF/ki
Appeal No. 1998-0817
Application 08/610,976
-9-
Shawn B. Dempster
Seagate Technology, Inc.
Intellectual Property - SHK2LG
1280 Disc Drive
Shakopee, MN 55379-1863