Appeal No. 95-5146
Application 08/152,557
said resin (7) does not make contact with the magnetic tape (5),
and are formed as concave areas (2b) and (2b) as indicated in
Figure 3" [translation, page 8, underlining added]. Thus, it is
clear to us that indentations 2b simply represent areas where
material from the conventional magnetic head has been removed to
reduce the amount of frictional contact between the head and the
tape. Therefore, we agree with appellant that indentations 2b of
Kimura are not properly considered cleaning grooves with a
scraping edge as recited in the claims.
Even if we were to assume that the edges of Kimura’s
indentations 2b might frictionally scrape the surface of the
magnetic tape at these edges, the specific dimensions of the
cleaning groove recited in claim 20 would not have been obvious
in view of the teachings of the applied prior art. The examiner
considers the specific dimensions to be the result of routine
design experimentation. Since Kimura designs indentations 2b to
reduce the surface contact between the head and the tape and not
to provide a scraping edge, the factors leading to the dimensions
of Kimura’s indentations 2b are totally unrelated to the factors
leading to the design of a cleaning groove. Since Kimura’s
indentations are designed for an entirely different purpose, we
agree with appellant that the specific dimensions of claim 20
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007