Appeal No. 2006-1439
Application No. 10/195,178
The Examiner has asserted that Masumoto teaches a method of
improving the damping capacity of alloys. The Examiner has
determined that Masumoto discloses a Co-Fe alloy and improves the
vibration damping by the addition of 4d transition metals including
niobium, molybdenum, and tantalum in amounts that fall within the
claimed range. (Answer, pages 3-4). We note the Examiner has not
stated that the alloy of Masumoto is magnetic and is within a magnetic
device as required by the claims. Throughout the present record, the
Appellants have argued, “Masumoto does not teach or suggest
magnetic materials or increasing damping of magnetic materials in a
magnetic device.” (Brief, page 5).4 As such, the Appellants have
challenged the Examiner to establish on this record that Masumoto’s Co-
Fe alloy is magnetic. The Examiner’s response to this argument
appearing on page 6 of the Answer merely states that a Fe-Co alloy is
taught in each of Masumoto’s examples. The indication that a Fe-Co
alloy is present in the examples is not an affirmative statement that the
“increasing damping of said magnetic material.”
4 Appellants also repeat this argument on brief, page 7 and reply brief, pages 3
and 5.
-4-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007