Appeal No. 97-2421
Application 08/202,411
suspensions 4a and 4b and the magnetic disk 1. A cam 12 is installed between shoulder parts 9a and
9b of the head lifters 7a and 7b and is driven by rotation driving part 13 (e.g., a stepper motor). The
cam 12 can be rotated to spread the head lifters 7a and 7b apart which causes head lift arms 8a and
8b to lift the suspensions 4a and 4b so that the magnetic head sliders 3a and 3b are held off the
magnetic disk 1. The cam 12 can be rotated so the head lifters 7a and 7b come together which causes
the head lift arms 8a and 8b to lower the suspensions 4a and 4b allowing the magnetic head sliders 4a
and 4b to float over the disk 1.
Claims 17-19 and 23 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by Carteau.
Claims 22 and 24 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by Kitagawa.3
Claim 25 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Carteau and
Kitagawa.4
OPINION
Since Kitagawa was published February 13, 1992, less that two weeks before the filing date3
of parent Application 07/840,905 on February 25, 1992, and since the present application is a
division of that application, Kitagawa cannot be § 102(b) prior art. We treat the rejection to be
under § 102(a). Appellants claim the priority benefit under 35 U.S.C. § 119 of Japanese
applications having an earlier filing date than Kitagawa. However, since no translations have been
filed we do not consider the priority documents to overcome Kitagawa. See 35 U.S.C. § 119(b)
("The Commissioner may require a translation of the papers filed if not in the English language
and such other information as he deems necessary."); Manual of Patent Examining Procedure
§ 201.15 (6th ed., Rev. 2 1996).
4
The first paragraph of § 103 was redesignated as § 103(a) as of November 1, 1995.
Pub. L. 104-41, sec. 1, 109 Stat. 351 (Nov. 1, 1995). Accordingly, the rejection should refer to
§ 103(a).
- 5 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007