Appeal No. 95-3335
Application 08/083,231
injection is such a contact. It is not helpful to the appellant
that the net magnetic moment in the electrical contact region can
be balanced out by magnetic moments elsewhere if all the magnetic
moments are added together. Moreover, the appellant has not
challenged or rebutted the examiner’s finding that the IBM
Disclosure describes techniques applicable to any ferromagnetic
film, "including the more common situation where different
regions of the film have magnetic moments that do not add up to
zero, as in a refrigerator magnet" (answer at 3, lines 14-16).
In the appeal brief on page 4, lines 13-14, the appellant
argues that the IBM Disclosure does not suggest to "directly
provide optical emission which is circularly polarized to a
significant degree." By "directly," the appellant means "e.g.,
without additional optical elements such as the polarizer 6 [in
the IBM Disclosure]," as is indicated also on page 4 of the
appeal brief. But the examiner is correct that the polarizer 6
in the IBM Disclosure is a part of the detector elements used to
analyze the emitted light and not a part of the elements for
producing the circularly polarized light. See IBM Disclosure
at p. 470, lines 5-7. Accordingly, the appellant’s argument is
rejected.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007