Appeal No. 2000-1240
Application 09/094,067
considered sufficient during operation of the disk drive."
Answer, page 6. Thus, the examiner takes the view that the
claimed clamp structure is shown in Obara.
We agree with the examiner's views because representative
claim 1 does in fact only recite "a clamp structure" and does not
recite a clamp per se or the detailed disclosed version of
clamping fingers. The function of the broadly claimed "a clamp
structure" is merely for "locking said disk in place during
operation of said rotating disk data storage device." This later
quoted material does not recite that a broadly claimed "a clamp
structure" clamps anything.
Because Obara has consistent teachings throughout its
written description that the rotor has been integrally formed
with other parts in various figures, and the cross-sectional
views of the various Figures 1-5 and 12 clearly show that the
rotor 9 is made up of ?a single-piece integrally formed
hub/clamp/rotor member," the examiner's views are consistent with
the arguments at the bottom of page 7 of the brief which
references the definition of the one-piece, integrally-formed
part of the hub 103 as disclosed at specification page 8, lines
5-11.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007