Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/727,624

SERVO RECORDING APPARATUS, SERVO WRITE HEAD, METHOD OF PRODUCING A MAGNETIC TAPE, AND MAGNETIC TAPE

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jul 09, 2024
Examiner
TZENG, FRED
Art Unit
2625
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Sony Group Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
87%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
90%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 87% — above average
87%
Career Allow Rate
666 granted / 768 resolved
+24.7% vs TC avg
Minimal +3% lift
Without
With
+3.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
16 currently pending
Career history
784
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.8%
-38.2% vs TC avg
§103
31.0%
-9.0% vs TC avg
§102
34.5%
-5.5% vs TC avg
§112
21.4%
-18.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 768 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Claims 1-32 are present for examination. Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 07/09/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Specification The specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. Claims 1, 19, 20, 25-27, 29-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakashio et al (US 2014/0268414), hereinafter as Nakashio, in view of Kobayashi et al (USPN 4,616,280), hereinafter as Kobayashi. RE claims 1, 19 and 20, Nakashio discloses the invention substantially as claimed. Nakashio discloses that a servo recording apparatus and a method of using it to produce a magnetic tape (see figure 1 and sections [0051], [0052]; i.e., servo recording apparatus 100), comprising: a servo write head that writes a first servo pattern and a second servo pattern to a plurality of servo bands of a magnetic tape (see figures 1&3 and sections [0054], [0055], [0059]; i.e., servo signal recording unit 13 to write first/second servo patterns 6 to a plurality of servo bands s0/s1/s2/s3/s4 of a magnetic tape 1), the first servo pattern and the second servo pattern being asymmetric with respect to a width direction of the magnetic tape (see figure 3 and sections [0054], [0008], [0076], [0111]; i.e., first servo pattern 6 and second servo pattern 6 being asymmetric with respect to a width direction of the magnetic tape 1), the magnetic tape being used in a data recording apparatus that includes a data write head disposed on top of the magnetic tape (see figures 1&3 and sections [0052], [0054]; i.e., magnetic tape 1 including data bands d0/d1/d2/d3/d4 where data tracks 5 being recorded by a data write head). However, Nakashio does not specifically disclose that a data write head disposed such that a longitudinal direction of the data write head is inclined with respect to the width direction of the magnetic tape by a first head azimuth angle. Kobayashi teaches that azimuth adjusting mechanisms are widely employed in a magnetic head supporting mechanisms of tape recorders, so that the attitude of the head is corrected such that the head gap thereof has predetermined angle, such as 90 degrees, with respect to the longitudinal direction of a track or tracks on a magnetic recording tape (see column 1 lines 9-17). The motivation of Kobayashi is to derive maximum output from a reproduce head (see column 1 lines 20-23). Nakashio and Kobayashi are combinable because they are from the same field of endeavor. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to modify Nakashio by including the teaching from Kobayashi in order to derive maximum output from a reproduce head. RE claims 25, 26 and 27, Nakashio discloses the invention substantially as claimed. However, Nakashio does not specifically disclose that a data head disposed such that a longitudinal direction of the data write head is inclined with respect to the width direction of the magnetic tape by a first head azimuth angle, and being adjusted within a predetermined range with reference to a reference angle, as well as that the phase difference is related to the reference angle. Kobayashi teaches that azimuth adjusting mechanisms are widely employed in a magnetic head supporting mechanisms of tape recorders, so that the attitude of the head is corrected such that the head gap thereof has predetermined angle, such as 90 degrees, with respect to the longitudinal direction of a track or tracks on a magnetic recording tape (see column 1 lines 9-17). The motivation of Kobayashi is to derive maximum output from a reproduce head (see column 1 lines 20-23). Nakashio and Kobayashi are combinable because they are from the same field of endeavor. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to modify Nakashio by including the teaching from Kobayashi in order to derive maximum output from a reproduce head. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 21-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nakashio et al (US 2014/0268414), hereinafter as Nakashio. RE claim 21, Nakashio discloses that a magnetic tape (see figures 1&3 and sections [0051], [0052]; i.e., magnetic tape 1), comprising: a base (see figure 2 and section [0052]; i.e., substrate 2); a non-magnetic layer that is stacked on the non-magnetic layer (see figure 2 and section [0052]; i.e., non-magnetic layer 3 laminated on the substrate 2); and a magnetic layer that is stacked on the non-magnetic layer (see figure 2 and section [0052]; i.e., magnetic layer 4 laminated on the non-magnetic layer 3), the magnetic layer having a plurality of servo bands to which servo patterns have been written (see figure 3 and sections [0054], [0055]; i.e., the magnetic layer 4 having a plurality of servo bands s0/s1/s2/s3/s4 to which servo patterns 6 have been written), the servo patterns including a first servo pattern and a second servo pattern that are asymmetric with respect to a width direction of the magnetic tape (see figure 3 and sections [0054], [0059], [0008], [0076], [0111] ; i.e., first servo pattern 6 and second servo pattern 6 are asymmetric to each other with respect to a width direction of the magnetic tape 1), the servo patterns in servo bands adjacent to each other having a phase difference (see figure 3 and sections [0054], [0059], [0008], [0076], [0111] ; i.e., servo patterns 6 in servo bands s0/s1/s2/s3/s4 adjacent to each other having a phase difference, such as a difference between the maximum voltage value Vmax and the minimum voltage value Vmin of the reproduced waveform). RE claim 22, Nakashio discloses that wherein the first servo pattern is inclined with respect to the width direction of the magnetic tape at a first angle, and the second servo pattern is inclined opposite to the first angle at a second angle that is different from the first angle with respect to the width direction of the magnetic tape (see figure 3 and sections [0054], [0055], [0059]; i.e., first servo pattern 6 is inclined with respect to the width direction of the magnetic tape 1, and the second servo pattern 6 is inclined opposite to the first angle at a second angle that is different from the first angle with respect to the width direction of the magnetic tape 1). RE claim 23, Nakashio discloses that wherein the first servo pattern and the second servo pattern have longitudinal directions (see figure 3 and its associated depictions; i.e., first/second servo patterns 6 have longitudinal directions X), and a length of the first servo pattern in the longitudinal direction and a length of the second servo pattern in the longitudinal direction are different from each other (see figure 3 and its associated depictions; i.e., a length of first servo pattern 6 having 3 strip lines is different from a length of second servo pattern 6 having 4 strip lines in the longitudinal direction of X). RE claim 24, Nakashio discloses that wherein a component of the width direction of the magnetic tape in the length of the first servo pattern and a component of the width direction of the magnetic tape in the length of the second servo pattern are the same (see figure 3 and its associated depictions; i.e., the length of the first and second servo patterns 6 in the width direction of magnetic tape 1 being the same). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 2-18, 28, 31, 32 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Claims 2-18 are allowable over the prior art of record because none of the prior art of record teaches or fairly suggests the limitations or features claimed in the claim 2 in addition to all the limitations or features claimed in claim 1. Claim 28 is are allowable over the prior art of record because none of the prior art of record teaches or fairly suggests the limitations or features claimed in the claim 28 in addition to all the limitations or features claimed in claims 21, 22, 25, 26, 27 combined. Claim 31 is allowable over the prior art of record because none of the prior art of record teaches or fairly suggests the limitations or features claimed in the claim 31 in addition to all the limitations or features claimed in claims 21, 22, 25, 26, 29, 30 combined. Claim 32 is allowable because it depending on allowable claim 31. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Judd et al (USPN 10,366,716) Biskeborn et al (US 2015/0043101) Nakao (US 2003/0099059) Takayama et al (US 2009/0161249) Nakao (US 2005/0254163) Any inquiry concerning this communication from the examiner should be directed to FRED TZENG whose telephone number is 571-272-7565. The examiner can normally be reached on weekdays from 2:0 pm to 10:00 pm. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, William Boddie can be reached on 571-272-0666. The fax phone numbers for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned are 571-273-8300 for regular communications and 571-273-7565 for After Final communications. Informal regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docs for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000 (IN USA). /FRED TZENG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2625 FFT January 24, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 09, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 24, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603105
LATCH FOR ZERO/FIXED SKEW DATA STORAGE DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12591137
Electronic Devices With Biased Guide Rails
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12579999
SPEED CONTROL OF ACTUATOR ARM AND SPINDLE IN A DATA STORAGE DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12579013
COMMAND PROCESSING DEVICE AND DISPLAY DRIVING INTEGRATED CIRCUIT INCLUDING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12567356
Driving Device and Driving Method of Electroluminescence Display Apparatus
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
87%
Grant Probability
90%
With Interview (+3.4%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 768 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month