Appeal No. 96-0311
Application No. 08/155,771
described at page 6 of the specification, “a bent portion of
the magnetic disk is defined in terms of the reference length
and the maximum deflection.”
We construe the instant claimed subject matter in
accordance with the definitions supra. With these constraints
in mind, we find that neither of the applied references makes
the instant claimed subject matter unpatentable since both
references are directed to surface bends at the edges of the
magnetic disk, i.e., only at the outermost peripheral portion
of the disk, and are not concerned with “bends” in other
portions of the disk. Independent claim 1 is very specific
that the “bent portion” of the claimed subject matter excludes
these outermost peripheral portions of the disk. Instant
claim 1 excludes all portions of the disk within 250
micrometers of the edge (as well as those portions within 250
micrometers of the inner periphery of the disk). Therefore,
we find no teaching or suggestion of any kind, in either
Uehara or Kojima, which would render the claimed subject
matter unpatentable within the meaning of 35 U.S.C.
§ 103.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007