Appeal No.95-2807
Application 07/944,653
designated by the reference numerals 140 and 142 in the Favrou
patent. Neither claim 1 nor any of the other appealed claims
recites that the head incorporating the two magnetic gaps is a
unitary structure. In fact, appellant’s head as illustrated in
Figure 3 of the patent application drawings appears to be two
side-by-side structures lying along what appears to be a central
dividing line extending vertically between the chain link lines
7B and 8B.
For the foregoing reasons, we will sustain the examiner’s
§ 102(b) rejection of appealed claim 1.
With regard to the § 103 rejection of dependent claims 3 and
4, the purpose of employing a pressure pad for a tape is known in
the art as evidenced by the use of such a pad in the prior art
head device shown in Figure 1 of appellant’s own drawings.
Moreover, Toshimitsu expressly teaches the art that the pad 5
provides close contact between the tape and the head space as
shown, for example, in Figure 3 and noted on page 3 of the
accompanying translation. Contrary to appellant’s arguments, such
a teaching would have been ample motivation for one of ordinary
skill in the art to provide Favrou’s head device with a
corresponding pad. Admittedly, Toshimitsu’s pad in Figures 3-5
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007