Appeal No. 96-2513
Application 08/037,064
On page 4 of the examiner's answer, the examiner stated that
"one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to
use two wear layers of varying wear resistance in a magnetic head
since doing this would provide the head with increasing wear
resistance over time, allowing the head to adapt and conform to
disk surface." That also happens to be the appellants'
motivation and objective for the claimed invention. For reasons
already discussed above, we find the examiner's rationale to be
based on hindsight in light of the appellants' disclosure, rather
than a reasonable suggestion stemming from the prior art.
Dependent claims 6-8, 12, 25, 26 and 29 have been rejected
over the EP Reference, Cullen, Oonishi, and further in view of
Grill. Grill discloses a protective coating for the magnetic
slider structure which supports a thin-film magnetic read/write
head (column 3, lines 14-16; column 4, lines 43-59). In column
4, lines 61-64, Grill states:
The protective coating 22 (FIGS. 5 and 6) comprises two
layers, the first layer being a suitable adhesion layer
24 and the second layer being a thin layer of amorphous
hydrogenated carbon 26.
-9-9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007